Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hoze Houndz

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. This has been up for a month and it's not going to benefit from another relist. WP:NPASR applies. Stifle (talk) 14:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hoze Houndz

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for additional citations needed since 2014 with no improvement. Sources are a production company's website, IMDB, and a WP:USERGENERATED site. WP:BEFORE discloses no evidence of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. No evidence this passes GNG or any applicable SNG. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:35, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete One mention found in Google, passing mentions in the Canadian Screen Guide in GBooks. Delete as no sources found. Oaktree b (talk) 20:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:55, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there are in-depth articles about the show, in national media coverage from the turn of the century. National Post ... actually the earlier more complete version of the article on the front page of the Montreal Gazette would be the better reference.Nfitz (talk) 03:17, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Having seen the articles referred to by Nfitz from National Post and Montreal Gazette, my assessment has not changed. Both articles are about Don Cherry and Ron MacLean, not about this program. They do not contribute to significant coverage about the show. Attempting to impute notability from these articles to this program is a class case of WP:NOTINHERITED. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 03:20, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The essay WP:INHERITED does say "Notability of one or more members of some group or class of subjects may or may not apply to other possible members of that group" - but I'm not clear what the class (or group) is in this case. Nfitz (talk) 03:25, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nfitz: that essay provides a definition: Inherited notability is the idea that something qualifies for an article merely because it was associated with some other, legitimately notable subjects. The articles you link are neither about Hoze Hounds but rather about the animated appearance of two legendary Canadian media personalities on the show. Using those articles as evidence of significant coverage of the subject in reliable, independent sources is not actually useful. It is significant coverage of Cherry and MacLean, not the show. The show is "...associated with some other, legitimately notable..." persons by these articles, but not legitimately notable itself. I hope that helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 13:20, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They're about Ron MacLean and Don Cherry working on this show, so they most certainly do count as coverage of this show. Coverage of Ron and Don in a Hockey Night in Canada context obviously wouldn't help to establish the notability of Hoze Houndz, but coverage of Ron and Don in a Hoze Houndz context most certainly does. Whether they count for enough on their own may be debatable, but they certainly don't count for nothing. Bearcat (talk) 13:33, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If I implied they counted for nothing, I apologize. I certainly did not intent to. These articles are, however, the only coverage beyond the database/UGC type stuff I mentioned earlier. I do not feel they are significant enough evidence that this show had an impact. No RS covered the start of the show, its end, any other events during its broadcast history, what happened after cancellation, reviewed it, or provided any other coverage about the show. If they did, they have been lost. That is why I said these two articles about Cherry and MacLean are not by themselves evidence that the show is itself notable. I hope that explains my position in further depth. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 13:46, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't list any other articles, as I thought the Montreal Gazette/National Post feature was more than adequate. There's certainly more out there - see comment below. Nfitz (talk) 16:21, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete On evaluation of the sources, I agree with Eggishorn above. The references aren't really about the show but the people involved, and it's not enough to meet GNG by my eyes. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 16:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added 3 more references to the article, and improved the first 3 that were added by Bearcat since the AFD started - the basis for nomination no longer exists. Nfitz (talk) 16:21, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Late addition of additional sources requires further discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:17, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I still don't see much for coverage, could be a brief subsection in the Alliance Atlantis article perhaps. Oaktree b (talk) 19:28, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alliance Atlantis is a distributor - and not even globally I think. The production company Amberwood Entertainment would work better - but that article doesn't exist. Another alternative would be Sheldon Wiseman - the producer. I've no doubt something in between those 2 articles and this one is notable - but this is all that exists currently. Nfitz (talk) 02:22, 19 April 2022 (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.