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 No consensus, default to Keep. Walton^One 16:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frogs in popular culture[edit]

Documents anytime frogs are mentioned in anything. Wikipedia is not a collection of information, and it should certainly not be so poorly sourced. DurinsBane87 07:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boil slowly so it doesn't hop away and escape Same poor quality as the copious other "in popular culture" articles deleted recently. cab 09:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as listcruft. -- Jelly Soup 11:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete -- Given that, despite policy, there seems to be a loose consensus among editors in favor of pop culture reference/trivia lists, I think a fair case could be made in favor of invoking WP:IAR on general principle here. However, I do agree with the matter of sourcing and also submit that a list on such a general subject might be unmaintainable. So I suggest deletion without prejudice, unless someone steps in with a boatload of references, and even then I'm not convinced that the article can ever be reasonably inclusive. Haikupoet 01:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I disagree that this is of the "same poor quality" as other IPC articles. This one is actually quite good, examining the caricature of the frog as a symbol, mascot, corporate spokesman in a fashion that is both informative and concise. It never occurred to me until reading the article about the oddity of having a slimy amphibian associated with a box of breakfast cereal, even if it is Sugar Smacks. Each article must be judged individually. Like most IPC articles, this could use a shave and a haircut, but this one is still well above the bar. Mandsford 01:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comment Many of these references aren't notable, more specific critera for inclusion should be made if the article survives AfD. DurinsBane87 03:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This looks like a list of all the frogs that ever graced any cartoon. Delete per WP:FIVE (trivia collection) and WP:NOT (loosely associated items) Corpx 04:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Mansford. The article may need more references, but this defintely seems like a notable topic. --musicpvm 08:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although this needs help. Owen 20:53, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - list of trivia and oblique references. Reference same policies ad guidelines as Corpx. - fchd 21:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per Mansford. Also note that current problems with an article are not a good enough reason for deletion, there is such a thing as fixing it! Mathmo ^Talk 01:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, for reasons given by Mandsford. As currently written, the article is a mixture of the sublime (example, most of the introduction is excellent and the part on Frogs in Egyptian mythology is very good) and the ridiculous (too many examples of this), but the topic is clearly encyclopedia-worthy for reasons set out in the first paragraph of the introduction. With some loving attention, this could become a Featured Article.--orlady 02:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all the delete arguments come down to "delete because some of the content is non-notable," which is of course completely opposed to Deletion policy, and should be translated into "keep, and edit"DGG (talk) 22:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia isn't a trivia guide. These pop culture lists aren't necessary on Wikipedia. In response to DGG's comment: read up on policies, instead of just disagreeing with people that voted delete. Next time use deletion debates to actually post a keep reason. Simply disagreeing with one side, and using that as your reason: isn't how deletion debates work. RobJ1981 00:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Total trivial fork, violates policy. Nearly all "in popular culture" pages are just forked off trivia pages that are not encyclopedic or needed here. None of the keep arguments have any merit. Biggspowd 05:17, 15 August 2007 (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.