Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chocolate Rain

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. Opie and Anthony are, unsurprisingly, not RS. They have farting monkeys or copulating catholics on all the time - that doesn't mean we ought to have articles on all their drivel. -- Y not? 04:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chocolate Rain

Chocolate Rain (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable Youtube video. —ptk✰fgs 23:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as non-notable. semper fictilis 23:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete YouTube isn't notable per se. Giggy _U^CP 00:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete If Tay Zonday gains any true superstar status then this article should be brought back. Until that happens... --Jon Ace 00:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, even by YouTube standards. --Merovingian (T, C, E) 08:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

  Change to merge. Article may be able to get some referencing. --Merovingian (T, C, E) 10:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• Merge Arguably a developing Internet Phenomenon as a quick Google search implies. Perhaps merge it into that article until it either takes off or fizzles out.
• KEEP* BITCHES WHATS WRONG WITH YOU? TAY and his CHOCOLAWT rainz is epic. Fark you wikigeeks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.130.105.254 (talk • contribs) 12:15, July 19, 2007.

Comment: You know everyone is going to ignore your vote (even though I agree it being epic)... The Conundrumer^T_C 21:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, There are less notable articles on wikipedia, and is still quite popular on several internet communities. -Zblewski
• Merge It belongs in Internet Phenomenon --SodiumBenzoate 19:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge I agree with SodiumBenzoate. --Gretyl 20:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge until it gets even more popular. It was featured on a radio show, so it should have a section in internet phenomenons. The Conundrumer^T_C 21:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge Received national exposure on TV and radio. This certainly suggests notability. Granted the article is pretty stubb-ish, and there's not a whole lot more one can write about it, so a merge into Internet Phenomenon would make sense until-and-unless the creator eventually warrants his own page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.62.90.221 (talk • contribs) 20:05, July 19, 2007.
• Merge per what SodiumBenzoate stated. Douglasr007 05:25, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
• Merge as per SodiumBenzoate. Tsunade 08:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep considering that it's popular on youtube and was on opie and anthony AND carson why wouldnt you keep it?- --Iguy513 02:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment: The reason why it's up for deletion is because YouTube isn't a notable source to begin with. Douglasr007 04:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I feel that if you don't think that YouTube isn't notable, then you are out of touch with today's society. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 96.224.104.145 (talk • contribs).

While just being on YouTube does not imply notability, the reverse is not true: that something can not be considered notable if it is on YouTube. The nominator requested citations and references. These have been provided. I think notability has been established for the topic. Though I still think the topic probably does not warrant its own article at this time, hence a merge would be in order. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.62.90.221 (talk • contribs).

You do realize the sources and references have to come somewhere other than YouTube, right? This is the whole point of the article being up for deletion. Douglasr007 23:30, 22 July 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.