Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crunchyroll Partners

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. WP:SNOW MBisanz ^talk 00:30, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crunchyroll Partners

This was a CSD candidate under G11, but it does not seem to be blatant spam. However, this is a very good example of a page that should not be on Wikipedia. Per WP:NOTREPOSITORY, WP:PROMOTION, and WP:DIRECTORY, this page is simply a useless list and is highly unencyclopedic. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR ^{( t • c )} 03:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the person who CSDed the article. It is also pretty much a copy of Crunchyroll. The site gained some notability, but not three articles worth, despite the claims of the site's PR person who created all three. No redemptive value as a redirect. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 03:41, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete why does this need a separate article? Seems like WP:PROMOTION 76.66.193.90 (talk) 05:42, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If Crunchyroll wants a list all of their partnerships, then they should host that list on their website, not on Wikipedia. (WP:DIRECTORY, WP:NOTREPOSITORY) The only time a partnership should be mentioned is briefly the main article if the partnership is covered by reliable third-party sources. I also don't see this as a viable search term either and it relies too much on WP:ONESOURCE (which shouldn't be a redlink). --Farix (Talk) 12:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. —Farix (Talk) 12:28, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Crunchyroll. Every partner listed under Crunchyroll Partners has a either a list page or a category page of their titles. Indeed, pretty much every anime licensor and anime studio page, not to mention manga publishers, has a list of their titles. I don't see where having a list of Crunchyroll's partners is any different, or unreasonable (see also WP:BUILD. 159.182.1.4 (talk) 13:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As in the other one, Wikipedia is not their online catalog, nor is this their place to host a brag list. The actual list was in the CR article too (he put it there, then made a separate article) and was removed as it was not appropriate contents for such an article. Nor is this website a licensor, studio, nor publisher (and, of those, the lists are being removed as the articles are improved). We don't list every video on YouTube, Joost, etc, so there is no reason to list everything here either. If people are interested in the site's detailed associations, they can go to it. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 14:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete as spam. Recommend Salt as well, since there seems to be a publicist involved. Edward321 (talk) 15:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete G11 Chzz ► 15:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete That redundant information with CrunchyRoll article and rather kind of propaganda :( People should better increase the main article quality rather than spaming useless child-articles. --KrebMarkt 18:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – the lead is indeed identical to Crunchyroll, and the list of partners does not belong here. It looks like someone is trying to use Wikipedia as their own web host. I'm indifferent about G11; one could argue that someone from the company is writing the article see this ANI post and is using the pages as PR. However, inclement weather indicates that it's doomed, anyway, so it's moot. MuZemike 03:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.