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 Overwrite with Toontown (disambiguation). There is rough consensus that, at this time, this is redundant to the Toontown (disambiguation) page, which is to be moved to this location. Any still relevant content can then be merged from the history to wherever it is needed. This is without prejudice to knowledgeable editors using the "untapped literature on the topic" and this page's history to create a new version of this article that clearly establishes notability under a new title such as Toontown (fictional city). Sandstein 09:23, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Toontown[edit]

Toontown (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)

The article fails WP:GNG. I haven't found any non-trivial mentions of Toontown itself. Mickey's Toontown and Toontown Online both have articles and I suggest that whatever isn't in those articles is merged there, with this article changed to a redirect to the article with the most pageviews. Sjö (talk) 05:11, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:35, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Toontown (disambiguation) and/or Who Framed Roger Rabbit; it's not entirely clear whether this page is a glorified DAB page, or about the area in Who Framed Roger Rabbit. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:34, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Toontown (disambiguation) as the article covers more than just Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Aoba47 (talk) 05:35, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as non notable and move Toontown (disambiguation) to that namespace._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:07, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect as this article is little more than a DAB page at this point, which we already have at Toontown (disambiguation). I am Quibilia. (talk) 19:06, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sjö, Mark the train, Power~enwiki, Aoba47, Zxcvbnm, and Quibilia: notice of reopened discussion.

• Keep. I will make several signed points below, which you may respond to individually, as desired. wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. Redirecting to Toontown (disambiguation) is a nonstarter as that put the pages into the WP:MALPLACED work queue. wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2. It is also a nonstarter to merge content from articles into disambiguation pages. wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

3. The previous outcome was a case of Wikipedia:Deletion by redirection. Some 25 pages link to "Toontown" and if there is nothing for these to link to then the links need to be removed. Granted, there was some WP:OVERLINKing here, but without any links the articles need a nearby link to a related article that explains what "Toontown" is, or perhaps be edited to explain it rather than rely on a link. wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

4. The topic is notable and does pass WP:GNG. The Google Books in the early 1990s, following the 1988 release of the film. I don't find the argument that the term fails WP:GNG very convincing, given all these mentions by multiple independent publications. wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

5. I question the need for a disambiguation page at all, as all of the items on the dab are Disney-related, excepting "Toontown", a nickname for Saskatoon which makes it a WP:TWODABS situation that could be handled by a hatnote. I think Disney made this a valid topic for a WP:Broad-concept article – there is a somewhat amorphous relationship between the articles on the disambiguation page. The idea that the article should "Merge with Toontown (disambiguation)" is another nonstarter. We don't merge content into disambiguation pages. This is more an argument for merging the disambiguation into the broad-concept article and deleting Toontown (disambiguation). If this is indeed a valid broad-concept created by Disney, then that negates the need to remove those 25 links to the topic. Also, per Wikipedia:Disambiguation § Partial title matches, Do not add a link that merely contains part of the page title, or a link that includes the page title in a longer proper name, where there is no significant risk of confusion or reference. Mickey's Toontown and Toontown Online are distinct-enough names that they probably won't be confused with the one in the Roger Rabbit film – or, if they are essentially variants of the same thing then Toontown should broadly overview them all, as it does. Indeed, Mickey's Toontown and Toontown Online would be WP:summary style subtopics of Toontown, and there would only be a need for separate, more detailed articles on Mickey's Toontown and Toontown Online if there wasn't enough space to cover all three in a single article. wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and move Toontown (disambiguation) over top of this. I read over wbm1058's arguments very carefully, but I can't accept any of them. The Google books search presented only lists uses of the word "Toontown" in a series of titles on reviews of the Who Framed Roger Rabbit movie. But, there is no coverage about Toontown independent of the subject - why is Toontown itself notable? Have reviewers compared Toontown to other settings in movies, such as the Death Star? Yes, an absurd comparison, but Death Star is an example of a movie setting that does meet the notability guidelines, much as it needs more citations. And why does it? We have detail about its development and its cultural impact. That's the part that confers the notability because it's the material in reliable sources that is independent of the subject, none of which we have about Toontown. A check of HighBeam Research showed only articles about the other subjects of the DAB page. If Disney did make this a topic for a broad-concept article, where are the sources that show this? Where are discussions from reliable sources about Toontown? If they don't exist, then this is not a notable fiction setting. Red Phoenix ^talk 05:29, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I read wbm1058's arguments and they haven't convinced me. The argument about what should happen to the page and it contents musn't obscure the most important question: is the article Toontown notable. I still think that it isn't. The Google links contain several duplicates (at least my list) and I didn't find any significant coverage in them, but only mentions without or with very little detail. Sjö (talk) 17:55, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment the question in my mind is: is the area from Who Framed Roger Rabbit notable enough for a stand-alone article separate from the movie? As there are no references, I don't feel that is necessary. The other content here is best handled as part of the DAB page (which can be moved to this location); the content is something of WP:SYNTH. I don't feel like having this article as a pseudo-DAB of "any place where cartoon characters live" is of any value above the existing DAB page at all. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, I hear the arguments about the lack of notability, though I don't follow what makes the Death Star notable without a closer examination of that (on the surface, that seems equally not independently notable from the franchise that created it). Following up on the need for coverage independent of the subject, I then wonder about the notability of the Mickey Mouse universe. That article asserts, The term "Mickey Mouse universe" is not officially used by The Walt Disney Company, but it has been used by Disney comics author and animation historian David Gerstein. So, the term becomes "notable" simply because one author and animation historian coined it? Does the author of the term need to be notable himself? I note that the only reference cited for the biography of David Gerstein is his resume. The difference between Toontown and the Mickey Mouse universe is unclear to me, so if notable, perhaps they should be merged – to whatever the most common name for this is. None of the rebuttals to my arguments have addressed my issues with the "merge" and "redirect" !votes. Lack of notability is a valid policy-based rationale, though, so "Delete and move Toontown (disambiguation) over top of this" is a viable outcome, and really the only viable outcome that's been proposed other than my "keep". I would suggest though, that rather than moving to Toontown (version 2), the broad-concept version should move to Toon Town, to clear the page history for the move of the disambiguation version. Then Toon Town can be redirected to the disambiguation, leaving the broad-concept history available for possible merging to an article such as Mickey Mouse universe. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first think I would respectfully caution you of is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - it is quite possible that the Mickey Mouse universe article has the same problems, and upon looking at it I am concerned it might, especially since it's been tagged for possible OR issues. In regards to Death Star, part of what makes it notable independent of the subject includes that we have sources specifically about Death Star itself, not just Star Wars. We have info about how the Death Star was developed, how it was concepted out and how it was made. We also have information on its cultural impact, not just as a part of Star Wars but as a concept itself. If you can establish that Toontown has such coverage about it, like information about how Toontown was developed or its cultural impact from multiple reliable sources, that would definitely help it to meet the notability guidelines. Hopefully that will give you somewhere to go; it's not my intention to get rid of your hard work if it can be kept in any way in accordance with the policy. I would just rather that we can ensure we are compliant with the policies, and if not, then we would have to go forward with deletion. My appreciation to the admin who has continued to relist this article to allow wbm1058 the opportunity to try to have this article retained. Red Phoenix ^talk 22:30, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect to Who Framed Roger Rabbit? as the primary topic. Then add a redirect hatnote from the film article to the dab page. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:02, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who Framed Roger Rabbit? with a question mark is tagged as a misspelling; the article is actually at Who Framed Roger Rabbit. It's actually framed as a statement. Maybe the fictional creature in the Dr. Seuss book Horton Hears a Who! framed Roger; I don't know as I haven't seen the film. Making Who Framed Roger Rabbit the primary topic is also a reasonable outcome; given the apparent consensus that "Toontown" is not independently notable (and I'm not really sure about the notability myself). But I point out that the current version of Who Framed Roger Rabbit introduces Toontown in this sentence "In 1947 Los Angeles, "toons" act in theatrical cartoon shorts as with live-action films; they regularly interact with real people and animals and reside in Toontown." That article doesn't explicitly explain what Toontown is... it relies on readers to click through the link to the topic: "Toontown is the anthropomorphic city where animated cartoon characters, known as Toons, reside.", per the lead sentence. I'd suggest that deletion isn't necessary – simply redirect to Who Framed Roger Rabbit so that at least that lead sentence can be merged into Roger with proper attribution in the edit history. wbm1058 (talk) 15:28, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand; delete the disambiguation page, as it basically lists variations on the same concept, rather than collecting unrelated topics. If anything, Mickey's Toontown should be merged into this article as a subtopic, as it is clearly derived from the Roger Rabbit Toontown concept. There is untapped literature on the topic. For example, Priscilla Hobbs, Walt’s Utopia: Disneyland and American Mythmaking (2015), p. 189, noting that Roger Rabbit "is more "adult" than the usual Disney fare" with "themes of sex, violence, and innuendo", which Disney addresses by including in its Toontown a Roger Rabbit-themed ride that, while "dark", removes the adult elements (thereby "removing the core of the original film story") and replaces them with a more child-friendly "damsel-in-distress rescue story"). Thom Andersen, in his video essay, "Los Angeles Plays Itself", describes Toontown as a "cartoon version of Chinatown". There is, therefore, more that can be done with respect to the conceptualization and evolution of this as a concept. If this is not kept, it should be merged into Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and section-redirected there. bd2412 T 15:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quick question, since you seem to have an understanding of relevant sources; are any of the untapped sources about Toontown or have at least a full section on Toontown, or just make passing mentions? It is good to see there is some information, but the sourcing needs to be in depth or we risk giving WP:UNDUE weight by giving a full article to something that just has a couple of passing mentions in sources about the movie specifically. I'm all for keeping this article if we can show that there are such sources, and that they are reliable. Red Phoenix ^talk 15:53, 21 July 2018 (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.