Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lost Generation (poem)

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 no consensus. Owen× ☎ 09:01, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lost Generation (poem)[edit]

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG, as there is no significant coverage from independent reliable sources. Poem won second place in a content that itself is non-notable. Several blog hits can be found, but all are of the form of "I like this poem." PROD removed without comment. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 00:16, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lack of notability. -Porchcrop ^{(talk|contributions)} 10:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The poem has been used quite often in a school setting, and appears to have quite a few youtube results, due to its promotion from the competition.
Keep It is referred to by this news article by MediaCorp Channel NewsAsia, a prominent Asian news channel: Young PAP postpones launch of online recruitment video cmɢʟee☺τaʟκ 22:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was also used as inspiration/parody by a Microsoft advert Searching youtube returns an pages of videos and google returns endless results.. skipping 30+ pages in still returning topical results on searches like 'Lost Generation Palindrome' or 'Lost Generation Reed' --KHobbits ^(T|C) 01:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Baseball Watcher 01:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This poem generated enough of a viral splash that there must be enough references out there to constitute notability. I'm not going looking for them but I'm sure they are there to be found Tesspub (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I love this poem, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of discovered knowledge, not a discoverer. At the moment, secondary coverage is lacking, especially in-depth coverage from reliable sources (a million people praising it on youtube doesn't count). If it is notable, it will be covered. Wikipedia can catalog it then, but an ecyclopedia should not be predicting if a poem will have lasting notability. Wickedjacob (talk) 16:22, 9 May 2011 (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.