Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GAR meme

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 Delete. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-07 06:44Z

[edit] GAR meme

GAR meme (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable meme, fails WP:V and WP:NOTABILITY, possibly WP:NFT. Essentially 4chancruft. JuJube 01:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete and reformat. Another cancerous internet meme article that is neither notable nor even close to meeting (or ever meeting) the fundemental attribution policy. NeoFreak 02:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - does not, and never will, meet WP:NOTE, like 99.9% of the memes 4Chan generates. --Haemo 02:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, highly unnotable "phenomenon," no notability whatsoever outside of a single internet forum. Krimpet 03:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect to Guts Delete, not notable and barring some sort of unforeseeable event never will be. --tjstrf talk 05:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I'd vote to delete on the basis of "meme"-hood alone, but this is a particularly isolated one. Wikipedia is not a web guide, and it is not a dictionary, and it is not a dictionary of web terms. Utgard Loki 13:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per Utgard Loki. Captain panda In vino veritas 03:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as a neologism without any attribution to support it's importance.-- danntm ^T _C 22:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

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.