Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 in the Internet

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. I find the indiscriminate list argument persuasive. henrik•talk 21:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 in the Internet

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This almost seems like an indiscriminate list; right now it is primarily about SOPA-related things which are covered elsewhere, but even if cleaned up I'm not sure it would be useful. Cerebellum (talk) 03:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

̶D̶e̶l̶e̶t̶e̶ Rename - What does the title really mean for a list? "In the internet"? Is that referring major internet events, computer events related to the internet, software events related to the internet, political events related to the internet, information available from the internet? This list is currently SOPA related only, but as it stands now could be expanded to include virtually anything.--Stv Fetterly (Edits) 19:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Seems just to be a list of SOPA protests, there is nothing that is not in protests against SOPA and PIPA. Furthermore, as the title is so vague (events "in the internet" could, potentially, cover anything which is mentioned on the internet - everything that happens), it cannot make a reasonable list. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It looks to me as though over the year this list could indeed expand, and it seems a bit hasty to delete it so soon. However, there are no other pages that cover "(year) in the Internet". Also the page could turn into just a gigantic page full of everything due to the extremlely vague title... Yellow1996 (talk) 18:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article's already got some good sources, though that could obviously be improved. It's a subject matter that'll likely only be more notable over time. — Cirt (talk) 03:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obviously expandable. The year started with SOPA, but there will surely be other notable issues also. DGG ( talk ) 06:34, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 02:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - title is so vague to be meaningless. As has been mentioned, there are no similar lists for previous years. Sionk (talk) 02:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. A notable topic. AfD is not for cleanup. Lugnuts (talk) 07:49, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. 2011 in the Internet, 2010 in the Internet, 2009 in the Internet, 2000 in the Internet, 1492 in the Internet, 1066 in the Internet, 4 BC in the Internet. Looks like the Internet isn't really the center of human history, and the world has not yet turned into Tlön. I'm not sure this means that the article should be deleted, but it does suggest an entire series of articles that do not yet exist.... - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- William the Conqueror totally pwned England. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 19:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unreasonable to delete the article at this stage, given that there's no reason to think that nothing significant that is Internet-related will happen this year aside from SOPA. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 04:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't think anyone's arguing that the article cannot be expanded . . . the question is weather or not the list is too broadly inclusive. As it stands now the title isn't worded very well. "2012 in the internet" should at least be renamed to something like "2012 Internet Events of Note".--Stv Fetterly (Edits) 20:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is already some more, and the year has just started. the chance that nothing will further happen is not very great.I see some suggestions I assume were made in jest: 2011 in the Internet, 2010 in the Internet, 2009 in the Internet, 2000 in the Internet, 1492 in the Internet; Myself, I see some difference between the plausibility of these articles. It's common to try to reject a topic by finding some topics someway like it that won't possible work, or to find some topics like it which might possibly need articles, but don't have them yet--I respect the ingenuity of trying to do both in a single argument, but putting together two irrelevant arguments doesn't actually make them any stronger. DGG ( talk ) 06:40, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - You're not supposed to create multiple recommendations in an AFD DGG (see WP:DISCUSSAFD). That aside, the main issue I see with the article at this point is the poorly worded title. A move to something like "2012 Internet Events of Note" would seem to make much more sense for this article.--Stv Fetterly (Edits) 15:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.