Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LUEshi (4th nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 of the debate was No consensus, even after discarding votes.SoothingR 09:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LUEshi

This is the very definiton of cruft. The only assertion of notability is the fact that it was signed by Shigeru Miyamoto. Other than that, it's an unnotable internet meme Toffile 08:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • And as a note, this is the article's 4th time at AfD. The first time no consensus was reached because only 3 users participated. The second time was a speedy delete as recreation of deleted material, though it's invalid because the first AfD was inconclusive and never made a decision to keep or delete. The third time we had a debated keep result. (3 keeps vs 3 delete and 5 merge, seems to lend more to inconclusive.)--Toffile 08:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with GameFAQs message boards seems like a good option to me. How about creating a "Culture" section in that article and putting the content from the LUEshi article in it? Nick Bush 09:58, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as per NickBush24. Funny, though not *really* encyclopedic enough for its own article.SoothingR 10:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge & Redirect per above. Gets 51,800 Google hits, but despite that I don't think this is notable enough for its own article. I wouldn't be sad if this ended up as a keep, however. VegaDark 10:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep notable internet memes. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 17:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable, it is like a obscure unground meme. --Rick Browser 19:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per above. NaconKantari e|t||c|m 19:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Notable internet meme. Accurate, sourced, verifiable. Coffee 20:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's by no means non-notable. I think it's definitely a keeper. rmzy717 AT SCHOOL 20:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. While LUEshi is a popular fad on GameFAQs, I've rarely seen it outside of there. Mr. Qwert 20:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • user's 8th edit in the past month.--Toffile 23:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. How else is one to find out the origin of LUEshi, and even what it is? Is the goal of wikipedia to keep secrets secret? --Statikeffeck 22:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • user's first edit in about a month.--Toffile 23:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge or Delete. "LUEshi" is a meme virtually exclusive to the GameFAQs community. It isn't nearly as widespread an internet fad as something like O RLY?. I don't believe it deserves its own article here. WarpstarRider 22:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changing vote, and additional comments. The article itself is largely fluff and only references GF/LUE/LL throughout its content. There is nothing in the article to suggest any significance outside of the community; it's comparable to the majority of the "Notable memes" list in the 4chan article. In my opinion, LUE itself is significant enough in GameFAQs history to warrant its own article (though others disagree), and LUEshi should then be part of such an article. The meme itself does not deserve its own page. WarpstarRider 22:22, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the information, but probably best to Merge it in somewhere. I've never seen it outside of GameFAQ. --Falcorian
  • Keep, it is a vital part of internet history - .(talk) 22:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.44.34.88 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 13 February 2006.[reply]
  • Keep if possible or at least Merge to GameFAQs community. I have to admit that while the LUEshi symbol is popular on LUE and LUElinks, it's not widespread on the Internet. Douglasr007 02:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The article should be re-written, though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.12.72.43 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 13 February 2006.
  • Keep. Easily passes a standard Google test. It's popularity has spread beyond the GF boards- merging it with that article would not make much sense. An alternate solution would be to recreate the LUE article. It has been deleted before, but there is absolutely no argument of whether or not LUE passes a Google test. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.107.197.49 (talk • contribs) 02:59, 13 February 2006.
Here's the thing, Google isn't the deciding factor of what should be on Wikipedia. Douglasr007 02:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'm sure my fellow LUEsers will rub me 'bout this, but this seriously is not a notable meme. Sorry, guys. I would suggest a merge to one of the GameFAQs pages, but editorial precedent (read: many, many, many reverts) suggest that nobody thinks LUE's culture is notable enough to be put on any of the GameFAQs pages. - - CorbinSimpson 03:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or Merge per Nick (who was a well known GameFAQs user) Sceptre (Talk) 12:47, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's notable. Additionally, as per Sceptre's comment, Nick isn't a well-known GameFAQs user, other than the fact that he had a bunch of accounts and got them banned. And Toffile, shut up about how many edits someone has made. That should have no bearing on the Afd page for this. --NSA 15:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    542 alternate accounts made him well known Sceptre (Talk) 18:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, it does, it may indicate sockpuppetry. How relevent I don't know. Let the admin decide whether those editcount is relevent or not, and I recommend reading Wikipedia:No personal attacks for reference. - Hbdragon88 22:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.174.154.11 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep It's quite popular, I've seen it around GameFAQs, YTMND, and several other game forums. It's becoming as big as the O RLY owl, imo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.152.2.34 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep. I would say merge with the GameFAQs page, but I think that it's too long to really fit there on its own, so it should probably have its own article. I think the content deserves to be on Wikipedia, and as I stated before, there's too much information to merge it into GameFAQs.-J Train
Let me clarify. My first thought was yes, merge it into GameFAQs message boards (heretofore referred to as GameFAQs). However, I went over to GameFAQs and noticed the article was already moderately long, and even if the whole article is not necessary for a merge, it would still account for a significant portion of the GameFAQs article. If there were a page such as GameFAQs fads, or something of the likes, I would say merge it into there, but I don't think that there are enough other fads to justify that kind of page. -J Train 03:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Protect. Message board fancruft, ONLY importance is on GameFAQs, the only group who primarily uses LUEshi is on GameFAQs. - Hbdragon88 21:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. This is getting insane. I'm predicting that this article will soon become a GNAA-type article, lots of AFD nominations (GNAA has eight AFDs as of this writing) but no deletions. Each AFD here keeps getitng shot down... - Hbdragon88 21:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Oh my, the LUEsers are up for it - I see a topic with 41 posts about this AFD nomination, plus two other topics about it. I don't know if this kind of effort was mobilized for the third nomination, but it's moving. And if this gets deleted, could it be protected? - Hbdragon88 22:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Is there some conspiracy to remove internet memes from Wikipedia we should know about? LUEshi is quote notable, with GameFAQs being one of the larger internet communities. Plus, its spawned its own sites and has been signed by Miyamoto. Quit trying to turn Wikipedia into an elitist encyclopedia under the guise of open source. SA9097
    • Comment. Open source means that anyone can use our coding, not that we have to let any useless, non-notable article be on the site. --Rory096 19:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, flood of meatpuppets. Request closing admin to check votes for contributions very carefully. Stifle 00:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • If I'm not mistaken (which I very well could be), this is to be decided not by the number of meatpuppets/sockpuppets, but by the number of and especially arguments presented by responsible users. -J Train 03:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Right. Let me clarify. The reason I've voted to delete is both that I agree with the nominator and that I instinctively vote to delete articles where a flood of "meatpuppets" (meaning new users, users with very few contributions, or unregistered users, no more and no less) contributes and asks to keep or "do not delete". My request was simply for the closing administrator to carefully check whether contributions from certain users should be discounted. Stifle 21:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete as a non-notable internet (site) slang. If I go to a website like this and enter in a picture then post it on a website like Something Awful or Offtopic.com, does my picture get its own article? I think not. --Rory096 19:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure that's how O RLY? was created seeing as the communities of 4chan and Something Awful are almost the same. Yes, O RLY? is more widespread on the internet but your logic is flawed. Douglasr007 00:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, your logic is pretty flawed. Maybe you didn't read the article, but this was actually a huge deal on GameFAQs and other places, such that users were banned or suspended for 2 months just for posting it once, and it's not anything shocking like tubgirl, goatse, etc. Your picture you've uploaded is just that; something of note to you, not a website with 3 million registered users and "hundreds of thousands times more hits than your personal website does". -J Train 03:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pfft. Nobody was banned for LUEshi. The worst I heard was purgatory, but that was pretty much brought on yourzselves by abusing it to the point of no return (i.e. Night of a Thousand LUEshis). Out of the 3 million registered GF accounts it was only a big deal to a few thousand, the LUEsers (22,000 as of ExcLUEsivity). Anyway, you're making it a strong canidate for merger - this did in fact was a big deal on GF, but can you prove it was a big deal elsewhere? - Hbdragon88 03:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my original idea was to merge, but I didn't think it was appropriate. Because I don't want to overload this page, please see my above reasons (under keep). -J Train 23:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It could be condensed down to a couple of paragraphs or two; it wouldn't be too hard. For instnace, before Cassandra de Vries was merged into Perfect Dark ( see its last edit before merger), that article was pretty long. But most of it was drivel and repetition from the main article. I could see LUEshi being condensed down to a small notation in the LUE section currently at the GFAQs message boards article. - Hbdragon88 04:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
O RLY? also didn't get an article until it actually was a notable internet meme, and even now it's up for deletion every 3 days. Once everyone on the net is using this, come back. Hell, once another of the major forums is using this, come back. I doubt they will though- it's just an ASCII picture, whether GameFAQ thinks it's more or not. --Rory096 03:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep notable and necessary for reference. Avengerx 04:02, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep LUEshi is an important meme — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinyboy21 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • User's 5th edit. - Hbdragon88 02:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should also be noted that one of said user's edits was a request to create an article for "luelinks.net".-J Train 03:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Two questions should come out of this whole discussion. First, are fads and internet memes noteworthy. Are they significant in the sense that anyone looking back years from now would even care? Probably not. Are they significant in the sense that someone might actually look up something like this for reference, yes, I've personally looked up the ORLY article myself to figure some things out. In discussing internet memes their inclusion may be inevitable in a community dominated by the internet.
The second question is whether or not it's possible to lobby wikipedia. Can a dedicated enough forum, which is all we're talking about here, defend an article or topic of their choice and promote it to notability? These votes suffer from a self-selection bias, the only people likely to show up are people who really want to defend the article, few people are likely to put the same effort into getting rid of it. But does this basically mean that a commmunity like somethingawful or slashdot can hold wikipedia articles hostage or dominate coverage of themselves and promote their topics? Aside from making votes like this more public or putting out an appeal to wikipedia that a message board or community is exercising undue influence, I'm not sure what we can do.--BigCow 09:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that, I, a LUEser, do not believe in the notability of this article, I think we can rule out the idea that any community can truly be solid on this issue. I think that notability of memes will establish itself, without the community's interference. - CorbinSimpson 03:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In the long run, almost certainly, just like in the long run any article tends towards being accurate since enough people will have had a chance to correct it. However, in the long run, we're all dead. The average VfD may have only dozens of users where as forums have hundreds of members at their disposal, we'll just have to trust that people in the community of wikipedia make wise judgements.--BigCow 20:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per NickBush24... and yeah it is time for WP:MEME so we don't have to keep repeating this ad nauseum ala the Brian Peppers AfD.--Isotope23 21:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep' It has played a very prominent role being a bannable offense and posted in many places. It's been around for a while and gets over 50,000 hits on Google. I'd say that is notable enough for an encyclopedia article on this internet meme as it will grow. SandBoxer 02:56, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep By itself, the meme is too obscure for its own article, but seeing as it's wrapped around such diverse areas such as GameFAQs, YTMND, eBaum's World, and Miyamoto, I'd say it just aobut qualifies as Wiki-worthy. BaronMasters 00:35, 19 February 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/LUEshi_(4th_nomination)&oldid=1082181783"