Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Save Toby

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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 03:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Save Toby

• Delete Website for a man who pretends he will eat his pet rabbit seems to exist primarily to drive Internet discussion. Succeeded in getting a listing in Snopes describing it as a hoax. Alexa says rank 90,757. Google says 70,900, many of which are promotional pages created by the SaveToby folks (such as CafePress pages selling their merchandise, any many blog posting pimping the page). Never achieved meme status. I don't see why Wikipedia should be part of the failed promotional efforts for this not notable website. Uucp 11:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete According to the Snopes article, it's just a hoax, and not a particularly interesting or famous one either. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep... absent any solid criteria for what constitutes a notable Internet meme, or any chance of having any, I have to resort to "well I've heard of it". At least we've got a reliable source in Snopes. --Malthusian (talk) 12:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Changed from weak to unqualified keep per Jeff. --Malthusian (talk) 15:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Andrew Lenahan. --Terence Ong (恭喜发财) 13:05, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Malthusian — I've heard of it too, and when I've asked people about it they've heard of it, and because of Snopes, the hoax itself is verifiable. —Cleared as filed. 13:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Little is known verifiably, and there's no proof the stunt had a great impact on anything. If an article has to constantly say "the website claims...", then you know something is wrong. If all the details were to become know, than the question is: so what? --Rob 13:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Snopes mention plus Alexa rating = notability, regardless of what one thinks of the site itself. Turnstep 14:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete. MSNBC article. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-31 14:35Z
• Keep notable internet memes. An MSNBC article [1] and Washington Post article[2] allows it to meet WP:WEB, which normally sucks for internet memes. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 14:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per drawnjeff. -- Astrokey44|talk 15:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Minor hoax. Pilatus 17:25, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep, as a notable hoax, one of those rare worthwhile animals not unlike a "score 5, flamebait" on slashdot. Adrian Lamo · (talk) · (mail) · 21:51, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Like the others, just about the first web meme nominated here that I've heard of. If it reached my cave... Has some sources too (per Badlydrawnjeff) --kingboyk 23:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I have difficulty calling it notable, especially, but at least, well-known. -09:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC) Tim Rhymeless
• Keep per notability standard. Calwatch 06:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Fairly notable. Englishrose 09:21, 4 February 2006 (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.