- 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wish I could think of an appropriate speedy criterion for this. It's not even a Flash animation, it's a gif! Absolutely no evidence of significance whatsoever. But - and I know you'll have ahard time believeing this - it is on YTMND. So unlike those responsible YTMNDers to make a Wikipedia article about their latest fad. Just zis Guy you know? 09:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Very cool animated gif btw. -- Koffieyahoo 09:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom - "The animation is hard to find" sounds almost like an admission of a lack of notability. BigHaz 09:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Funny and good quality work, but, ehr, not even by inclusionist standarts deserves a separate article. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 10:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Something of a cult animation with unknown origins, definitely belongs here under the art header. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.74.30.171 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 02 August 2006 (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.