Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lobster Magnet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Proto::► 13:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lobster Magnet

Lobster Magnet (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
  • Delete. No cited sources, no evidence of notability. Fails WP:WEB, WP:MUSIC, WP:V. Tevildo 17:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • speedy delete per a7. Tarinth 17:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • There is an assertion of notability ("a popular internet meme"), so I don't think A7 strictly applies. However, we'll see. :) Tevildo 17:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm lord fez high mayor of over-agressive speedy deletions (according to some) but I would consider that not to be a claim to notability. Surely this is spilling the beans but if it said something like "and has been written up in newspapers and used in a movie" then it's a claim. - brenneman 23:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable internet flash video. b_cubed 17:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - not notable, or at least no sources to backup the claim of notability. Jayden54 18:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, no reliable sources. bogdan 19:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep A google search for "Lobster Magnet" in quotation marks brings up 10,100 hits. And I tried to look up Lobster Magnet on wikipedia some time ago, although unfortunately at that time I had no success. Baiter 08:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete no reliable sources, thus failing WP:WEB, WP:V, etc. Borderline speedy, IMHO, but I guess there's no great reason not to give it the rest of its five days. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. I watched this flash animation in 2002, and it was certainly mildly popular back then, in the sense that I knew a number of people who had seen it. However, it is not groundbreaking in any way and seems to fail notability requirements. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Babcockd (talk • contribs) 04:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
  • Delete Insufficient notability, sources. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:15, 8 January 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.