Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Los Tres Hermanos

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. Mailer Diablo 10:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Los Tres Hermanos

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

Non-notable group of people, doesn't appear to meet WP:BIO, WP:WEB, WP:ORG, etc. I put a Prod tag on this, which the original author removed claiming the article passes the google test. However, this is a common spanish phrase and the large number of google hits appears to be unrelated Xyzzyplugh 12:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - People whose primary notability is through newgrounds is pretty much an automatic deletion... Wickethewok 15:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - per nom. Ghits is only one of a number of suggested alternative tests for notability (and this case it would look to be a bad one). Also looks to fail WP:OR - Yomangani 16:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Google test did not refer to Los Tres Hermanos & Co. so much as their animations. Halo vs Counter Strike, which is a somewhat broad area of discussion, has their animation as the first hit. There are many sites which have put HvsCS on the air--with or without LTH's permission. And Los Tres Hermanos, while being spanish words, is not a phrase. It simply means "The Three Brothers." Socialist Freak Boy 1:04, 22 July 2006 (CST)
  • Keep - I think that the Los Tres Hermanos Wikipedia page should stay where it is. They obviously have a big enough fan base to have one. Their Halo vs Counter Strike cartoon made one of the top lists on NewGrounds, quite a feat to pull off. Removing this page would be useless anyhow. It isn't hurting anyone. HarlequinSniper 2:24, 22 July 2006 (EST)
  • Keep - Halo vs Counterstrike is a great flashmovie, and I think it should stay. taterWRC 1:32, 22 July 2006 (CST)
  • Keep - Los Tres Hermanos & Co. are a quality animation team with a cult following, of which I am part. rov3r 2:33, 22 July 2006 (EST)
  • Keep - Los Tres Hermanos & CO has a large fan base that is continue to grow. As of late, their animations are of noteable quality and are reviewed highly. I myself am a member of their cult following. xTurnips 1:40, 22 July 2006 (CST)
  • Keep -Lost Tres Hermanos should stay where it is in wikipedia. They are reviwed and appreciated, and make excellent work. There is no sense in deleteing their entry, for people read it, and they have the right to have an entry. Their fans would hate this, and there is absoloutly NO reason in doing this, KEEP IT. As already said, it doesn't hurt anybody. Slider388 6:06, 22 July 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - Flash animation teams should be giving the same respect as Other animation companys. Also its good to study diffrent art styles and how they work Knux990 11:52 (EST)
• Comment The above 6 Keep votes are from probable sockpuppets, they all voted in a brief period of time, all have no other edits besides this article, and they altered the times listed in their signatures to make it look as if they voted at different times of the day than they actually did. It is likely they are the sockpuppets of the same person who was vandalizing the following article which I was involved in, and that they came to this one once the first one was Protected: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lentil (slur) --Xyzzyplugh 11:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Only one way to be sure. Check the IP Addresses. And there appears to be no editing involved--they all did vote at roughly the same time, just in different time zones. Socialist Freak Boy 13:41, 22 July 2006 (CST)

• It doesn't really matter as per policy on WP:GD - users who have no previous edits can be regarded as socks and "may be discounted during the closing process". So its up to admin discretion to decide how to take those "votes" into account if at all. Wickethewok 19:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Ah, I didn't notice that. The sockpuppets didn't alter the times they posted, they used different time zones. Clearly I have much to learn about sockpuppetry. --Xyzzyplugh 00:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - very honest, they say 'The first animation published on Newgrounds.com. Animation was very shoddy, the plot uninspiring, and it was, in the opinion of Alex, more than worthy of the blam vote.' I am afraid they get the blam vote (whatever that might be) here unless they can demonstrate notability which I don't see yet. BlueValour 04:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - While their first animations weren't very good, their more recent stuff is of notable quality. Trigger Happy, and Back in the USSR have excellent graphics, A Marxmas Special, No Child Left Behind, and Halo vs Counter Strike are all very humorous with witty humor. They got off to a rocky start, yes, but so do most people. Just look at Sean Connery's shoddy acting in his early career. LTH have developed a large fan base, produced many animations, and are now very recognized in the online community. Socialist Freak Boy 05:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

• We are certainly not judging how good the animations are (I have never seen any of their work). This AFD is for reasons such as WP:BIO and WP:WEB. These guidelines state objective inclusion criteria. If they indeed continue to grow in popularity to the point where they may meet any inclusion criteria, I am of course willing to reconsider my opinion on "Los Tres Hermanos". Wickethewok 13:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 20:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as per Wickethewok. Dionyseus 20:45, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. `'mikka (t) 01:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• De1337 as failing every criteria a non-notable company producing web videos can fail. -- Kicking222 01:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. -Royalguard11^Talk 02:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete non notable. Vanity article. Also because i think sock puppets have voted --Ageo020 02:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Wickethewok. Viridae^Talk 02:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: It's hard to ignore those sock puppets: they tend to show up like funeral flies. However, the point here is that this is a vanity article on animators whose external references are simply Newgrounds. That's web mentioning web, which doesn't count, as far as I'm concerned, as validation. Beyond that, the article, complete with its bad punctuation and irregular capitalization, tells us merely that they were a bad studio and now...have more attention. Wow. Geogre 02:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:VAIN Danny Lilithborne 03:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:VAIN, WP:WEB, and WP:ORG. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 03:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep/Comment - I fail to see how this is a vanity article. WP:AGF It's not promoting any of their animations, nor does it seem to portray them in a shining light. It has no external links to a website which they own, it's not promoting merchandise, it merely talks about the origins and possible direction of their work and studio. Furthermore, while they're not the most famous animators to hit the scene, WP:BIO they have a very large base of viewers and a smaller--but still large--base of dedicated fans. That should seem to be some semblance of notability. Even if it isn't, it flat out states on the page that "notability is not formal policy (and indeed the whole concept of notability is contentious)" I feel this article is approached from a neutral perspective, and can continue to grow as their organization's recognition and filmography grows. They meet notability under Large Fan Base and Name Recognition under the people section. WP:WEB As for web content, Los Tres Hermanos is being featured in an interview for a magazine titled Blue and Gold about their opinions on the upcoming next gen. systems, showing their animations are wide spread enough to get them recognized. Halo vs Counter Strike won the Daily 3rd Place Award and got Weekly 12th Place out of hundreds of thousands of animations submitted every week on newgrounds, which means they must be doing something right and are good at what they do. The content is distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators. Los Tres Hermanos & Co's animations meet all the qualifications for notable web content, Los Tres Hermanos & Co themselves meet many of the qualifications for notable people. I will admit they do not meet WP:ORG standards, and they are not an organization according to wiki-standards, but I feel they're not an organization either. They are simply some people who make animations--they're good at what they do, they're getting recognized for it, but they're not an organization. They're an animation team, not a company/organization/corporation. I see no reason to delete this article. Socialist Freak Boy 03:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Note that this is Socialist Freak Boy's second Keep vote. --Xyzzyplugh 04:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Note that this was not so much a vote as a further explanation as to why I feel it should be kept. Besides, this is not decided by "votes" as you put them, but by the argument therein. This is not a vote, but a discussion, so why should it matter that I wish voice my opinions in greater detail? Socialist Freak Boy 04:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
    • You can voice your opinion as many times as you want(within reason) in an AfD debate, but you should only "vote", that is type in keep/delete/merge/etc in bold text, once. Doing so multiple times will appear to be an attempt to fool people into thinking there were more keep/delete/whatever votes than there really were. --Xyzzyplugh 05:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. So non-notable it hurts. -- GWO

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.