Talk:Hanna-Barbera
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
It's dot com (Talk | contribs) (→This, that, and a whole lot of other stuff: what should be done) |
Slipstream (Talk | contribs) (Reply) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
== This, that, and a whole lot of other stuff == | == This, that, and a whole lot of other stuff == | ||
I realize a lot of work has been put into this page, but it seems to me that every single reference listed here is either speculation or [[TTATOT]], and thus it would be a real stretch to say that they were specifically referencing Hanna-Barbera, intentionally or otherwise. I think every entry in the article as it stands now should be removed, and if no legitimate examples can be found, the article itself should be deleted. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC) | I realize a lot of work has been put into this page, but it seems to me that every single reference listed here is either speculation or [[TTATOT]], and thus it would be a real stretch to say that they were specifically referencing Hanna-Barbera, intentionally or otherwise. I think every entry in the article as it stands now should be removed, and if no legitimate examples can be found, the article itself should be deleted. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
+ | : It may be TTATOT now, but most of the things were created by Hanna-Barbera, and it's clear on some of the facts that it is intended to be a reference, mainly Scooby-Doo and the Bands of the 70's having cartoons. I say '''keep''' (edit conflict'd)--{{User:Slipstream/sig}} 03:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:54, 4 August 2007
This, that, and a whole lot of other stuff
I realize a lot of work has been put into this page, but it seems to me that every single reference listed here is either speculation or TTATOT, and thus it would be a real stretch to say that they were specifically referencing Hanna-Barbera, intentionally or otherwise. I think every entry in the article as it stands now should be removed, and if no legitimate examples can be found, the article itself should be deleted. — It's dot com 03:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)