Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natural Born Kittens

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Natural Born Kittens

Natural Born Kittens (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

No sources to verify that this is making it to the air. Ghit sis poor -- thee is an intervbiew with the creator that hints that a deal has been signed, but there is nothing concrete anywhere. The JPS^{talk to me} 23:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Note: Several comments have bee removed from this discussion by anonymous accounts beginning with the prefixes 86.135.185.* and 86.135.90.*. Please check history for full details. --Farix (Talk) 22:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Retain I am the creator of the series and a deal has been signes yes, I can't divulge too much information at theis time because of an NDA. The Website has also been around for several years. before it was picked up as a show. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Guru Larry (talk • contribs).

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 08:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete AfD template was blanked on article page, and the show has to actually air on an actual network before it becomes notable. Nate 11:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Retain In the meantime, Why not change it to a website category then? Theres notable proof of the site, in both a .com and .co.uk domain which has existed for several years and appears on several other sites. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.135.144.180 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Note/Comment This IP was the one that deleted the AfD template before I restored it. Why would we change it to a category, it's clear that you're stubbornly keeping the article, no matter how much proof of unnotability there is. Until a network releases something saying this is a future project, it's still on the drawing board and going nowhere else. Nate 05:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete No evidence beyond this two year old press release that this will be produced into a TV series. And I don't trust the "agreed in principal" as a sign that it is going to happen as evident in the Rich Rodriguez case. --Farix (Talk) 03:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  Let me also add that this is clearly a vanity page based on the article's original author claims to be the artist of the subject. So I upgrade to Speedy delete under WP:CSD#A7. --Farix (Talk) 03:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  Farix, You are welcome to your opinion, but opposing to something just because of your over zealous fanboyism towards manga/artists who are not born in Japan (like you have to other wiki's of the same ilk) is blatent racism and fashism and will not be tollerated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.43.106.165 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

  First, I remind you to remain civil and refrain from personal attacks. Second, I never said anything about whether this was manga or anime, both of which have clear definitions. Third, don't remove someone else's comments from an AFD discussion because you disagree with them, that is vandalism. --Farix (Talk) 23:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as per WP:NOT#CRYSTALBALL - If something cannot be verified, in this case due to a No Disclosure clause then it does not belong on Wikipedia. If there is no press release or advertising then isn't this Wikipedia article breaking the No Disclosure clause? The author cannot divulge too much information at this time so Wikipedia should not consist of any information that would get the author into trouble. --Squilibob 06:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete smells like a duck. JuJube 10:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• I suppose thats fair enough, As soon as i'm legally allowed to divulge info or it's on air, I'll ask to recreate the page then, delete away. But I can assure you that it isn't a duck and it isn't vanity. (talk)

• Delete - the TV series seems have have been announced about three years ago (March / April 2004), and nothing has been heard about it since. If anything actually turns up on TV, then it can always be recreated. The website on it's own doesn't seem notable either. FredOrAlive 16:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. It's not real yet, so it's crystal-balling. Off it goes. WMMartin 18:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Unsourced crystal balling. I'm also not too sure about how genuine the article actually is; it seems odd to release a picture of the character into the public domain since studios usually rely on copyright enforcement for profit. —ShadowHalo 04:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.