Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reaux, Reaux, Reaux Your Boat

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 redirect to List of The Inspector cartoons#1966. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reaux, Reaux, Reaux Your Boat

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

non notable individual episode Gaijin42 (talk) 19:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:27, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of The Inspector cartoons#1966, no enough coverage nor enough contents to sustain a separate article for this episode. Cavarrone 04:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:27, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - is there a reason why you nominated all of these separately? —Мандичка^YO 😜 23:18, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - as above. I agree that these really should have been bundled into one omnibus nomination. Neutrality^talk 23:29, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality Wikimandia I tried that with similar articles for the pink panther episodes, and there was a huge problem with entrenched editors claiming that each episode was an exception for some reason and that they shouldn't be bundled. It took 2 mass AFDs, and several individual AFDs as well to get rid of them. Since some of the same editors are involved in these articles I didn't want to go through the same crap again. I apologize for the AFD spam tho. Gaijin42 (talk) 01:00, 5 June 2015 (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.