Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Huang (animator): Difference between revisions

Michael Huang (animator) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Most of the coverage seems to be about BFDI and I don’t think it passes GNG. The non-BFDI related information is trivial and doesn’t establish notability much, though I might be wrong on this. I think this should be redirected to Battle for Dream Island unless more coverage is found/ Z E T A³ 02:32, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait for more coverage on Huang Wikiman2230 (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If we have to wait then I say it’s WP:TOOSOON. Jurta ^talk/_contribs 12:59, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ty :3 Wikiman2230 (talk) 02:54, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft/Weak keep: The argument isn’t a really good excuse though I see your reasoning. Subject rarely passes WP:SIGCOV with only one source significantly talking about Michael himself in detail, and I notice a couple sources having no correlation to Michael himself in detail or in general, or blatantly talking about The Scale of the Universe with his brother, failing WP:NRV. I see potential of a standalone article rather than a full deletion but for now, this is gonna need more reputable sources about Michael in detail. ConeKota (talk) 02:52, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect We can’t just have non-notable articles in hopes that they will eventually become notable. He’s not individually notable from the article yet. Redirect to Battle for Dream Island. ^Wiinter_U 03:14, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, as a fan of BFDI Michael doesnt seem to be very notable individually(only known for 2 things and most of the coverage is about those 2 works), especially that its not merged with cary Animalsrule2024 (talk) 03:39, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This isn’t a valid argument to be honest. ConeKota (talk) 04:25, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the points are valid. I don’t see how the Cary draft can avoid being near-identical to this article. There are a couple of things that set Cary apart from Michael (Abacaba^[1][2][3] and 10003 Caryhuang), but not much that would set Michael apart from Cary. Both are best known for what they’ve worked on together, so it would make more sense to have just one article that’s about both of them. If each twin gets a separate article, it may be difficult for us to agree on redirect targets for Huang twins, Huang brothers and Cary and Michael Huang. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 12:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

exactly Animalsrule2024 (talk) 16:06, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but theres not many sources and Cary is more notable so its good to as well either change the page or redirect Animalsrule2024 (talk) 16:06, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t even do anything nowadays without someone judging me for it 💔✌️ Wikiman2230 (talk) 23:07, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

really should stop taking these personally; nobody is judging you specifically, they’re judging the article grapesurgeon (talk) 14:09, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is judging you. They’re judging the article for notability. –not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 12:15, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t copy content from another draft nowadays without its author judging me for it. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 14:25, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should’ve given attribution in the edit summary at least because Wikipedia is CC-BY-SA 4.0. But yeah, the material Wikiman wrote is under a free license, as is all other text on Wikipedia. Z E T A^C 17:02, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tried, but the link in my edit summary is red because I forgot that the title had a disambiguator. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

its plagiarism 🤦 Wikiman2230 (talk) 00:05, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft bc bfdi tpot 20 alONE ~2025-34554-90 (talk) 01:08, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Man I feel like this is gon get deleted 😔 Wikiman2230 (talk) 03:43, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can see this being a draft aswell, but most likely a redirect, you could copy the source before it is to potentially be reformed into a redirect into a new draft and improve upon there! ConeKota (talk) 04:17, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea Wikiman2230 (talk) 15:25, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]