- 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 keep. I considered relisting this, despite the dearth of anyone actually proposing delete, since there was a legitimate presumption of at least some support for delete from something sent to AfD through DRV.
However, even in that DRV it's much more "It should go there for full consideration, rather than "it should go there because it's not notable".
As such, I'm determining consensus purely from this AfD, and with it being a straight keep stating notability is shown, so is the article. Nosebagbear ( talk) 13:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
R/AmItheAsshole
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- R/AmItheAsshole ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
a speedy A7 deletion was overturned Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2020_December_30, under a clear consensus the sources were too significant for speedy deletion to be appropriate; but also that the article should be send to AfD for review. The main sources that may go towards notability are probably:
- this story from vice
- this story from the guardian
- this story from the Daily Dot
- this story from Vice
per the existing discussions, others might possibly be found, or possible not. In either event, as the admin closing the DRV I'm neutral, I'm just listing it here based on the consensus there to do so. Wily D 06:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 06:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep I'm the person who initiated the deletion review and re-created the article. The existing sources establish notability. Elliot321 ( talk | contribs) 07:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Per above.-- Kieran207 talk 14:29, 7 January 2021 (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.
- 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 keep. I considered relisting this, despite the dearth of anyone actually proposing delete, since there was a legitimate presumption of at least some support for delete from something sent to AfD through DRV.
However, even in that DRV it's much more "It should go there for full consideration, rather than "it should go there because it's not notable".
As such, I'm determining consensus purely from this AfD, and with it being a straight keep stating notability is shown, so is the article. Nosebagbear ( talk) 13:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
R/AmItheAsshole
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- R/AmItheAsshole ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
a speedy A7 deletion was overturned Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2020_December_30, under a clear consensus the sources were too significant for speedy deletion to be appropriate; but also that the article should be send to AfD for review. The main sources that may go towards notability are probably:
- this story from vice
- this story from the guardian
- this story from the Daily Dot
- this story from Vice
per the existing discussions, others might possibly be found, or possible not. In either event, as the admin closing the DRV I'm neutral, I'm just listing it here based on the consensus there to do so. Wily D 06:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 06:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep I'm the person who initiated the deletion review and re-created the article. The existing sources establish notability. Elliot321 ( talk | contribs) 07:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Per above.-- Kieran207 talk 14:29, 7 January 2021 (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.