Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"Who Made Huckabee?"

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 keep per consensus. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 16:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I meant to also mention that it is generally discouraged to do renames during a deletion discussion, besides simply for being a waste of time/editing if in fact an article ends up deleted. Please use the talkpage of the article for deciding on proper naming of the article. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 16:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Who Made Huckabee" feud[edit]

Per non-notable, WP:RECENTISM. This was a sketch that occurred for short period of time, whats makes it notable? Wheres the long-lasting real world significant in this? This is sketch was very minor compared to other recurring sketches, like the ones found in Colbert Report reccuring themes and Sketches from Late Night with Conan O'Brien. Conan has recurring sketches that have been going on for 15+ years, this lasted less than a month. The fact that it wasn't real, it makes it less significant. Some of what is mentioned in this article dosn't really have anything to do with the sketch. The entire "reception" section just mentions the raiting. Other section discuss the writers strike. This should be mentioned in maybe a paragraph in each show's article, but not a full-fledged article.--Coasttocoast (talk) 01:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep my heart is with nom. but this seems to be sufficiently well documented that I think it passes on a technicality. JJL (talk) 02:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Essentially what JJL said. Though, I'm gonna say that it needs a better name. I might have to jump in a move it... hm... Leonard^(Bloom) 04:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep per aboveMyheartinchile (talk) 04:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete/merge oh come on. this can easily be merged into one of the Colbert-related page. come on, i oppose deletionsim as much as the next guy but this subject can easily be included in its entirety with al of the work preserved iwthin an existing page naturally. Smith Jones (talk) 05:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

comment, why only Colbert? wouldn't it have to be repeated on O'brien and Stewart articles too? why repeat it so much?Myheartinchile (talk) 19:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ot could work out!!! Give it a chance, dude. I meant, you dont know what might happen if we copied it three times. It ha a common root based on WP:BLP1E, WP:V, WP:N, and WP:D. those guidelines and policies all back up this view of agreement. Smith Jones (talk) 23:49, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, renaming it "Who made Huckabee?" makes it clear why it must be kept. Fee Fi Foe Fum (talk) 10:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How, exactly? Algebraist 10:30, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because the title takes it out of the realm of a fictional feud and into the amazing fact that together, they made Huckabee. Fee Fi Foe Fum (talk) 10:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

are there any szouces calling it "Who Made Huckabee"??? If not, then it will go back to the name it had before, or else. Smith Jones (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that's what the three comedians called it while they were involved, so the title change is appropriate. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 19:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely and I found this source : "Indecision 2008" site confirming my name-change. Smith Jones (talk) 19:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:48, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your source on something related to the Daily Show and the Colbert report is the Indecision '08 blog? How is that reliable or independent? Protonk (talk) 03:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dont piss on me. It was Cinemaniacs source. I took it from her on the Who Made HUckabee talk page and past it off as my own discoverie (which i now admit was wrong; i just wanted to look smart okay????) Smith Jones (talk) 05:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to piss on you. Just asking questions. Protonk (talk) 08:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Smith Jones, I'm a guy. d:) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fox News, The Associated Press and The New York Times also referred to the feud as "Who Made Huckabee?", so I think the title change is best. Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, the encyclopedia title should be a little more dispassionate and descriptive. "Who made Huckabee" can redirect to it. Protonk (talk) 02:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weakest possible delete The subject is ummmm....kinda barely not notable. But the article is well sourced, well written and clever. This article is written in the fashion I would like to see other, more august articles written. Protonk (talk) 03:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks; I'll take that as a compliment! :) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It was meant as one. Protonk (talk) 02:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I can't possibly imagine that renaming this article "Who Made Huckabee" follows the MOS in any serious sense. It needs to be returned to the name it had at the beginning of the AfD. Protonk (talk) 03:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re-Comment - I would have to agre with you that the name violates WP:MOS. i will revert my namechange imminentl.y Smith Jones (talk) 05:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I think the sourcing verifies it but it's notably could be better argued/worded in the article. Fair use images should be reduced too. Otherwise, well written and sourced: to delete an article of this quality would work against promoting quality editing on wikipedia. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 13:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Say, thanks! I'll take that as a compliment! Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - Keep -- you are absolutely write about the name. I have restored the name "Who MAde Huckabee". Smith Jones (talk) 23:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's a very well-written article and well-referenced, but looking through the footnotes it appears that there are very few secondary sources which relate directly to the feud. About three quarters of the references appear to be related more generally to the comedians, their shows, the WGA strike and Mike Huckabee's presidential bid, with only a handful of articles and TV reviews dealing with the subject directly. It was an extremely funny but ultimately non-notable series of sketches with no lasting significance for anybody. I agree, WP:RECENTISM applies. As detailed and well-written as it is, this article simply isn't notable. -Shoemoney2night (talk) 17:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It relates to many notable circumstances of the 2008 television season, the presidential elections, crossovers in fiction, etc. Perhaps more links to the page from articles involving these subjects would enhance its noteworthiness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.114.156.204 (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in strongest possible terms. This article should be featured. If it passes AFD, I seriously will nominate it for Fa. What was the OP thinking?? JeanLatore (talk) 03:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. The OP makes a pretty strong case. While the article is wonderful, the notability is borderline. We are talking about a series of sketches here. I'm on the fence about the notability in general myself (as the news links prove that something is there, or prove that we report on meaninglessness), but I can see what the OP was thinking pretty clearly. Protonk (talk) 03:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Shoemoney2night. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Shoemoney2night pretty much nailed it. Can't see any lasting notability nancy ^(talk) 14:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Just to make things clear - WP:Recentism is NOT wikipedia policy and so should not form the basis of an argument for deletion. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 06:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge per Shoemoney2night. In Hindsight, Huckabee wasn't really made anyway. Reywas92 ^Talk 15:33, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Exactly, which is why the "feud" is so admittedly silly; it was done in an effort to fill time and garner more viewers for all three programmes via cross-promotion. You've got to admit, though, Huckabee probably was overjoyed he became such an unlikely source of material for late night talk shows. :) Cinemaniac (talk • contribs • critique) 16:28, 7 July 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.