Talk:Weird Twitter

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 May 2016. The result of the discussion was merge to Twitterature.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Weird Twitter article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Internet culture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

edit
history
watch
purge

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Proposed merge into Twitterature[edit]

Given the fact that there are no sufficient reliable sources to sustain a proper article, and what few sources do exist are just barely enough for a stub, I suggest merging this into its own section on Twitterature, which covers this exact type of faddish material. Laval (talk) 19:56, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (as article creator) - I am not an expert on the topic, but they seem to be separate subcultures. This is demonstrable by checking sources. Not one of the sources in this article mentions the term "twitterature" at all, and none of the English-language sources in other article (I haven't checked the others) use the term "weird Twitter" at all. The major reason why I kept this article short is frankly because I prefer concision; the topic is clearly notable and the article could easily be expanded. While this article's pageviews were generally lower until a rash of vandalism a few days back, the difference is not colossal. Blythwood (talk) 20:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]