Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tronald Dump

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 and redirect to Hanksy. Vanjagenije (talk) 01:29, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Tronald Dump

Tronald Dump (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Unnecessary and poorly referenced stub. Also an orphan article. SirLagsalott (talk) 12:39, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

• Redirect to Hanksy, where I just Merged it. Delete Well, by merge I mean I added a line to the other article and found more sources. The sources certainly don't support a stand-alone article, but there's enough to include it in the artist's. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:00, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

• Update. Mduvekot makes a good point. "Tronald Dump" isn't actually its name such that it would justify a redirect. The subject is now covered at Hanksy to the extent it should be covered on Wikipedia. This page should be deleted. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:27, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

• Redirect per Rhododendrites . There's nothing to support a standalone article. Delete. The mural has only been referred to as Tronald Dump by unnamed sources. Tronald Dump does have other meanings, one that is only cited to the urban dictionary, and several that are not cited at all, such as a character in an animated cartoon and a blog. None of those are notable or supported by reliable secondary sources. Mduvekot (talk) 16:16, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator and Mduvekot. Clearly fails WP:GNG and so doesn't qualify for a standalone article, and the content has already been merged to its rightful place.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 17:11, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
• Comment – Here's some sources: , . North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

References

• Merge/Redirect to Hanksy. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
• Redirect per WP:NOPAGE. Esquivalience ^t 21:30, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
  • @Northamerica1000 and Esquivalience: Just making sure you saw above that "Tronald Dump" doesn't actually look to be the name of anything (it was a description used by one or two publications), so, to me, it doesn't look appropriate for a redirect. I've already added more about this topic to Hanksy (in terms of sources) than existed in this article, so merge doesn't seem necessary either. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:58, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
    • Both of the sources I posted above refer to the painting, so retaining my merge/redirect !vote. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:06, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

• It wouldn't hurt to have a redirect for navigation. Esquivalience ^t 20:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

• Fair enough. Thanks for the responses. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:42, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

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.