Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Panda sneeze

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 Spartaz Humbug! 23:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panda sneeze

Panda sneeze (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This seems to be an non-notable video. A phenomenal viral video like Numa-Numa might be noteworthy (since it has appeared in the news), but I believe that this is not. Marlith T/C 05:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete - non-notable --DAJF 05:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep it has also received wide (although not in-depth) coverage per a Google news search. I can add the most relevant links to the article, which at the very least attest to its notability on YouTube (e.g., most of the articles refer to it being one of the most popular videos on YouTube). If not keep, redirect to viral video. ~Eliz81(C) 06:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: Believe it or not, it is notable. With mention in the Washington Post, USA Today, and on FOX News (amongst many others), its definitely notable. - Rjd0060 06:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or if absolutely necessary merge to YouTube - WP:NOT#NEWS, sources in the article consist of one passing mention and two scarcely mentioned(s). It's a sixteen-second World's Funniest/You've Been Framed clip that's popular on youtube and has been mentioned in some sources/made filler news. And? Apart from giving a short synopsis (good grief) and reeling off the places its been mentioned, what exactly can be said about it? Are we going to have an article on every popular YouTube video or Newgrounds flash game now? Coverage of internet culture and memes is important when they have a lasting effect, but all I can see here is a variation on "ha ha" and *click* to the next video. Someone another 10:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete...i mean Boom Goes the Dynamite doesn't have it's own page, why should this Doc Strange 12:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, non-notable bit of video --Moglex 12:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Very weak delete. Yes, it has had mentions in the news but WP:NOT#NEWS and does not cover passing mentions of things like this - could never be any more than a stub.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 14:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete delete delete delete delete. There. I've said delete the most times in a deletion discussion. All I need now is for someone to record me typing delete delete delete and put me on youtube and I can have my very own article. Or maybe someone writing about HOCKEY, who happens to type "panda sneeze" in his article (thus gaining a GHIT), will type "delete delete delete" and find me here and write about me. Then I can have my very own article. Ridiculous. Um, delete. Keeper | 76 16:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC) That's Keeper with a K.
  • Keep, 145 Google News hits makes it seem notable enough to me. Nominator's argument for deletion was that it hasn't appeared in the news, and well, it has, so the nomination isn't backed up by much now. 96T 17:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - It does seem to have been the subject of a few news stories which are sourced in the article, which grants it a fair shot against the non-notable argument - which appears to be all it was nominated for. Shallon Michaels 17:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
    • No, it hasn't been the subject of any of those news stories. Crazysuit 20:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. Of the 3 sources provided, two don't discuss this, and one only has a few sentences about it (as part of a much larger article). Crazysuit 20:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability is not temporary and this is probably as ephemeral as it gets. --Smalljim (talk) 15:49, 18 November 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.