Talk:Bambi's Children

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnmaFinotera (talk | contribs) at 01:42, 20 July 2008 (→‎Notability of article: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconNovels Stub‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Notability of article

The mere fact that Bambi's Children is a sequel to one of the most famous stories in the world alone makes the article noteworthy per Wiki guidelines. However, simply summarising the plot is a waste. The problem is, if we merge this article into the main article Bambi, A Life in the Woods, then all we still will have is a summary of the plot. (The article about the book Bambi is also achingly short of material.)

To summarise:

1) Deleting the article is too drastic given the notability of the subject. 2) Merging the article into Bambi, A Life in the Woods would make the article awkward and possibly lopsided with the given summary. (The main article already mentions the sequel.) 3) This leaves simply leaving the article as it is. Nowhere near a good solution, but the best one available. Hopefully, someone will be able to come along and expand upon it.

Lighthope (talk) 21:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no being a sequent to Bambi doesn't make it notable. See WP:BK for the book notability guidelines. Both book articles need a lot of work. Merge is a consideration, but I'd like to see if we can find the necessary sources to establish whether this sequel is notable. I know Bambi is, despite its bad article, but this one I'm less sure of hence my tagging it. -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 23:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I disagree. One of the first things people will ask of Bambi (or any other story people endear) is "Is there more to the story." With regard to WP:NB, Bambi's Children qualifies simply by being attached to the original Bambi as well as being published in multiple formats. If we are going to argue that simply being a sequel to a very famous story is not notable enough, then you must nominate Charlotte's Web 2: Wilbur's Great Adventure and Curse of the Maya among thousands of others for deletion or merging as well. That said, I am not objecting to a merge for this article per se. The problem with a merge is that there is nothing to the Bambi's Children article that can not be summed up by the line that already appears in the novel Bambi article. I'd hate to see the plot summery deleted simply for expediency. Ultimately, notability (even by Wiki guidelines) is in the eye of the beholder. I don't want to see an article deleted simply because of a too-rigid application of what was never meant to be a hard and fast rule. Lighthope (talk) 01:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Films have different notability requirements, so that argument doesn't hold. And no, being attached to the original Bambi does not give it notability. Multiple formats means its been adapted, not that it has been reprinted (which I don't believe it actually has been for a long time, conidering how long it took me to find a copy). People asking 'is there more to the story" doesn't mean it gets its own article. That said, you seem to have a misunderstanding of the notability tag. It is not a "delete this article tag" nor is it a suggestion for a merge. It is indication that this article does not currently demonstrate its notability per Wikipedia guidelines and that work should be done to be sure it does meet notability. If the necessary reliable sources can't be found, then discussions should be undertaken as to whether it should be merged or deleted. Notability may be in the eye of the beholder, but despite your feeling that it was never meant to be a "hard and fast rule," a lack of notability per relevant guidelines is one of the most common reason articles are deleted. -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 01:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)