Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angus(sketchshow)

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:07, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Angus(sketchshow)

Notability claimed but not asserted. A {{prod}} tag was rejected, so AfD is the next step. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:57, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear WikiDan

I would say that Angus meets the third criteria:
The content is distributed via a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster

I know that it is a short description so far, but I have not got alot of information about the show yet. I'm not the creator of the show, but I want to make a page, where information about the show can be gathered, so that fans of the show can read about the show, the charaters in the show and so on.
Please, don't delete the page.
I just have to get it out to the fans, so they can contribute with additional information about the show.
Thanks in advance
Alaunus —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaunus (talk • contribs) 21:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Alaunus, unfortunately YouTube does NOT qualify as a respected medium that is independent of the creators. YouTube will blindly publish anyone's videos as long as they don't violate the terms of agreement. Anyone can put any junk they want up there, and get 0 hits, but it's still there. This is NOT what is meant by the WP:web guidelines. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 00:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails all Wikipedia:Notability (web) criteria. Article is based on three amateur videos uploaded to YouTube. YouTube is not considered a respected and independent distributor, but rather a trivial distribution on a hosting website. I'm surprised this wasn't a WP:CSD. — CactusWriter | ^needles 22:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per CactusWriter. I also question why it wasn't a Speedy Delete. DARTH PANDA^talk 00:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment For editors who wonder why the article wasn't a speedy delete: the original article claimed notability, which is, in itself, sufficient to avoid speedy deletion (see WP:CSD). The alternative in such cases is to propose deletion using a {{prod}} tag, which was done. However, once this tag was deleted, the only option was a full-blown AfD discussion. Gotta play by the rules. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 04:10, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. You are quite right. — CactusWriter | ^needles 07:45, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do to the article if I want to avoid it to be deleted? And how come all these persons, famous BECAUSE of YouTube, have a wikipedia site? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_YouTube_celebrities — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaunus (talk • contribs)
- Comment - First, please note that pointing to any other articles on WP is not a valid argument concerning the merits of this one (see OTHERSTUFF). However, concerning those people listed as YouTube personalities (for example: Ben Going or Chris Crocker), they passed notability, not for simply posting videos, but rather for garnering significant coverage in national press (see the list of references on their pages. Because their videos received tens of thousands of views, they were discussed by independent sources. It is the outside discussion which gives them notability. — CactusWriter | ^needles 15:34, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I see no coverage of this set of youtube clips that would establish notability -- Whpq (talk) 16:19, 23 October 2008 (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.