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. Consensus indicates that the movie is not notable enough for inclusion. I note that Blurpeace's original vote was a "strong delete", but was subsequently edited by Drramsey. Arguments for keeping the article are weak, and include WP:ILIKEIT. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ed, Edd n Eddy's Big Picture Show (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

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

This is a contentious article. It has been in AFD at least three times under this name, and several other times under "creative misspellings". In the past, the concerns were over notability, as the movie had not even been released. This current incarnation shows the same concerns: there are no verifiable references from reliable sources. The Ed, Edd n Eddy article already contains a synopsis of this movie, and as WP:NOT, this current article is basically a painfully detailed plot summary. I'd prefer this to be redir'ed to Ed, Edd n Eddy, but given the edit wars, inanity, etc, over this article, I'm going to bring it AFD so that I wider, and generally uninvolved population, can help to build some sort of consensus. Yngvarr (t) (c) 10:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: This particular article has been CSD'ed three times. The other AFDs are

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed, Edd, n Eddy's Big Picture Show
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed, Edd n Eddy's 1st Movie

Yngvarr (t) (c) 10:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- treelo _radda 11:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- treelo _radda 11:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: So far it is doggone difficult to find any material in reliable sources about this flick. It does have an IMDb page which reflects releases in 3 countries, including Australia, but no links to any media coverage. Google News does show a bit of recent coverage in Italian papers--can anyone interested can read Italian?[1][2] Searches of Variety and Animation didn't turn up anything. Some of the concerns expressed in former discussions (such as WP:CRYSTAL) don't seem to apply anymore, but notability of the film, separate from the series, does still seem to be an issue. --Arxiloxos (talk) 19:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Both are poor as one speaks of it being previewed at a smalltime animation festival in Rimini and the other is basically a TV schedule. treelo _radda 19:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep and clean up - The movie was made and I'm watching it right now. So the "it's never been released" statement is far from the truth and I keep despite the above because the nom made a rather poor choice in wording and because this a TV show which usually falls under notability especially because of it's high profile nature. Rgoodermote  22:46, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as wholly unreferenced and lacking any evidence of meeting the Notability gudeline. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 23:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and come back in a year. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 01:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Wonder if you could elaborate on that statement? Yngvarr (t) (c) 11:50, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect Delete I'm yet to see a decent reason as to why this article should be kept, so far the reasons for are that it should be kept through inherited notability and to wait a year before requesting again, the last one striking me as the least reasoned !vote here as it doesn't say why a year's wait should be enough. I guess it could be some kind of bizzaro-recentism logic but I'll await further clarification. Even with the many AfDs proceeding this, they were for crystal-balling so a bit moot here. The lack of sourcing for this overlong synopsis along with no establishment of individual notability separate from the series doesn't give me much confidence in this article's future though I expect it to be recreated several times before being protected. treelo _radda 03:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Change of !vote, I thought maybe it could be a good redirect but nope, a redirect can just be turned straight back into the article with a click of an undo link. No, let these overzealous fans work to recreate the content. Also, I know it aired elsewhere, I've seen it too but I don't see much in the way besides fanfappery regarding it, not notable at all. treelo _radda 22:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, (X! · talk)  · @721  ·  16:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As usual, until Time Warner/Cartoon Network/Turner Networks ever release a press release saying this project will be coming out (and that standard has never been met in any of the previous three decisions), this is still all WP:OR based on suppositions of what the movie will be like when not a frame has been screened except internally or via leaked copies. If it has aired internationally, where are the sources? Why couldn't a more compact plot summary suffice? If there is any way to convince me to change my vote to a keep, it would be to source the article with reliable descriptions of the film from someplace besides a fanboard.Nate • (chatter) 04:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Come on keep it up This was a awesome movie if it wasn't as good as it was i would say delete. The movie did come out in a few country and it should come out in north america in the next year. The point is that it is a movie it did come out and it was good keep this page up and going — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drramsey (talk • contribs) 04:03, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• This debate isn't regarding where it has aired or how good or bad people might believe it to be, it's about if there's any sourcing for the film and if it's notable, neither of which have been shown to be there so far. A North American airing or whether or not you think it's awesome is irrelevant yet many keep !votes make much of just that. treelo _radda 08:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, i loved this movie keep this page up make more . –blurpeace ^(talk) 07:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:ILIKEIT isn't a reason to keep. treelo _radda 23:29, 18 August 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.