Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remember The 13th Hoax: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 18: Line 18:
*'''Delete''' - Although there seems to be coverage, I don't think that it is encyclopedic and fails [[WP:N|notability]] guidelines. It is a one off, having no lasting effect gag to make some money that is pretty insignificant.- [[User:Pmedema|Pmedema]] ([[User talk:Pmedema|talk]]) 17:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - Although there seems to be coverage, I don't think that it is encyclopedic and fails [[WP:N|notability]] guidelines. It is a one off, having no lasting effect gag to make some money that is pretty insignificant.- [[User:Pmedema|Pmedema]] ([[User talk:Pmedema|talk]]) 17:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - No lasting significance; one-off stunt with ordinary coverage. [[WP:NOTNEWS]] and [[WP:BFD]]. [[User:Carrite|Carrite]] ([[User talk:Carrite|talk]]) 06:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - No lasting significance; one-off stunt with ordinary coverage. [[WP:NOTNEWS]] and [[WP:BFD]]. [[User:Carrite|Carrite]] ([[User talk:Carrite|talk]]) 06:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Actually, The singer in the article Beeki Vendi, I did some research and found that he went under a different stage name "Yasha Swag" and he has news coverage. If you search "Yasha Swag" it's the same person who sings Purple Ninja...
*'''Keep''' - Actually, The singer in the article Beeki Vendi, I did some research and found that he went under a different stage name "Yasha Swag" and he has news coverage. If you search "Yasha Swag" it's the same person who sings Purple Ninja...
http://popdust.com/2012/03/14/yasha-swag-go-go-go-viral-video/
http://popdust.com/2012/03/14/yasha-swag-go-go-go-viral-video/
http://www.dailydot.com/news/pickles-yasha-swag-cheating-youtube-views/
http://www.dailydot.com/news/pickles-yasha-swag-cheating-youtube-views/

Revision as of 15:25, 11 November 2013

Remember The 13th Hoax (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)

advertising through the backdoor The Banner talk 01:09, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator....William 01:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article should not be deleted. This article does not violate any Wikipedia Policy and Guidelines. Since this article has very recently been approved, Perhaps it needs more time to develop. Juiceentertainment (talk) 02:24, 8 November 2013 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]

  • Well... a promotional article can always be cleaned up. I'll go through and remove the worst of the promotional prose so we can judge it on whether or not it passes notability guidelines. As far as an article passing AfC, I'll have to warn you Juice that this isn't always a guarantee of passing notability guidelines. It's a little bit of a sore subject on Wikipedia that a lot of articles can pass AfC but not pass the main guidelines for notability. There does seem to be an assertion of notability, but the bigger problem here seems to be a depth of coverage since almost all of the coverage is from a very short period of time. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:52, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete/userfy. This did get some coverage, yes, but overall the coverage is fairly light. It spans a very brief point in time and much of the article coverage is brief in nature. A lot of it just repeats the same thing over and over again, which doesn't really give a depth of coverage regardless of how many brief articles you have. For comparison's sake, I'll hold up the AfD for the Ikea Monkey, something which easily received about 2-3 times the coverage that this website has, yet it didn't pass AfD either. The coverage just isn't here. I have no problem with someone userfying this for the time being, but I honestly doubt that this will gain any further coverage. What we have on the article currently seems to be the extent of the coverage in reliable sources and that's really only from a period of about 7 days. The internet seems to have largely ignored this website for the most part. It got attention and some views, but it's nowhere near as big as it'd need to be to really pass WP:GNG. I'd suggest a merge somewhere, but I don't really know any specific article that would really be appropriate. Viral marketing should really only have mentions that are overwhelmingly notable (ie, an article) and I'm a little leery about automatically adding every internet thing to List of Internet phenomena, as that turns it into an unwieldy and unmanageable list. It's not really an internet meme, so it can't be added to that list either. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 07:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:28, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://popdust.com/2012/03/14/yasha-swag-go-go-go-viral-video/ http://www.dailydot.com/news/pickles-yasha-swag-cheating-youtube-views/ http://now.msn.com/will-yasha-swag-become-this-year%E2%80%99s-rebecca-black http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-12-07/okay-what-is-this-yasha-swag-pickles-video-all-about/ http://newmediarockstars.com/2012/12/internet-nonsense-yasha-swags-pickles-is-the-best-and-also-the-worst/ http://news.softpedia.com/news/Viral-of-the-Day-Yasha-Swag-Pickles-313398.shtml http://planet1051.com/yasha-swags-pickles-video-has-over-8-million-views-in-7-days-why-video/ http://entertainment.ie/wtf/Forget-Ultan-Sherry-say-hello-to-Yasha-Swag/155488.htm http://worldofwonder.net/terrible-viral-video-of-the-day-yasha-swags-pickles/ http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/beta-digital-column-29698038.html

It looks like he botted on his old videos but this time around he hoaxed the nasa website to get viral attention once again. I don't know if you guys think this is significant enough to add as an article? Or link it somehow with Remember The 13th?