Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KanyeToThe

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. Der yck C. 22:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KanyeToThe

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Wikipedia:Notability Dfnj123 (talk) 02:37, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please Delete. This article has no notability at all. The only references that actually talk about the site are ones from the site itself. The page has also become the subject of intense vandalism. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 02:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please Keep. They worked for their page, let them have it. Extra note: Fashion Expert wasn't me, you just canceled a persons vote for no reason. Rocabear (talk) 03:09, 10 January 2012 (UTC) — Rocabear (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete: Not noteworthy. In response to the above vote, you can work hard at anything, but if you don't do it right, you may not get it. Calabe 1992 03:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"" Please Keep." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.17.231.20 (talk) 05:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 05:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (or redirect to Kanye West and add a sentence there iff it's a reasonably official fansite). The independent (WP:RS requires third-party reporting) refs given with the strong claims of notability do not support the notability of the site itself. Some do not even mention it at all. The overall pattern I see is "A happened because B happened on C; A is cited and sounds important therefore C is notable", but notability is not inherited. Notability is the threshold, not effort or passion. DMacks (talk) 03:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

:::* Please Keep. No reason for the article to be removed. Admirers of the site decided to create a page in its honor. FashionExpert (talk) 03:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.202.251 (talk) [reply]

Delete. Effort involved in creating a page does not exempt it from deletion. See WP:EFFORT. Additionally there is a reason in this case-it fails the general notability guideline. Also, are FashionExpert and Rocabear sockpuppets? They both used the same !vote, similar reasons, and made the same signature mistake (I have fixed the link mistake). User:A412 (Talk * C) 03:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they're both Rocabear (as is "Wikipedia Owner" below); check the history. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 05:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~::: Please Keep. They earned it to be honest.. Wikipedia Owner (talk) 04:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocabear (talk • contribs)~~ *Note: Struck out additional !votes from User:Rocabear (pretending to be different users). Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 05:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC) [reply]

You don't have to strike them; SineBot is an expert at catching impersonators. :P →Σ τ c. 06:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Couldn't find any RS. →Σ τ c. 06:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Σ. Phearson (talk) 06:45, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not getting anything notable, lots and lots of self-promotion though but nothing reliable. tutterMouse (talk) 15:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.80.57 (talk) 18:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a majority vote, and the fate of the article will depend on the merit of the arguments presented in this discussion. Simple claims that the article should be kept or deleted without a sufficient explanation (often referred to as !votes) hold very little weight in these discussions. Chris the Paleontologist (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm not finding anything in reliable sources which would indicate this subject meets WP:WEB. Gongshow ^Talk 02:26, 14 January 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.