Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Media Representations of Instagram

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 23:57, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Media Representations of Instagram[edit]

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

This topic is not encyclopedic and it's not reasonable to think that we can document every instance of Instagram being mentioned in popular culture (imagine if we did this for every significant company). The article is also based on a lot of primary sources, where the quotes are coming from, in violation of WP:ORIGINAL. Tchaliburton (talk) 23:51, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The tables of quotes are not at all encyclopaedic, do not provide any benefit to the reader, and are not sourced. It's basically just a collection of every time someone who may be popular has mentioned the service. The rest of the article, looking at the section headings, looks to follow a question-and-answer style, or almost like an essay divided into small questions. I think that the other subjects of the article could be easily explained in Instagram#Controversy or somewhere similar within that article, with no need for this article or a redirect. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:40, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a fairly indiscriminate list of media mentions and to be honest, it's essentially the type of situation that XKCD mocked in one of their comics that took years for us to live down. I can't really see where many of these mentions really warrant being listed on Wikipedia in any way, shape, or form. If the mention or controversy is so notable that it'd merit being in the article then it should be in the article. However at the same time we need to make sure that we're not being overly redundant in listing every example of how someone has used Instagram or complained about it in one way or another. This is pretty much just someone's student paper about Instagram and I don't see much here that isn't already covered in the main article in some form or fashion. There's really nothing that needs to be merged, so this is just a delete on my end. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:10, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged it as an A10, partially because it's pretty much redundant to Instagram but also because there are snippets of books, song lyrics, and so on that aren't properly cited and could be seen as a copyright violation. I'm not as worried about the copyvio issue, although that is something to be worried about. I've left a message on the editor's page and if it does come out that she's a student then we could probably e-mail her a copy of the page and direct her towards the main Instagram article. If she is a student, then I have to say that this does seem to be happening quite a bit this year (students creating articles that are largely redundant to pre-existing articles and comprising of OR as opposed to routine notability and tone issues)- is there any way that Wikimedia could do a campaign aimed at educational institutions pleading with them to use Wikipedia:Education program? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no situation in which this is needed. Let's mention every time Facebook was mentioned in popular culture. Or Google! If it's really that important of a mention (like an extremely in depth movie on the intricacies of Instagram), then mention it in the main article. We don't need a separate article to categorize every time something was mentioned. Also, I put a big copyvio template on the article as I am concerned about the use of the excerpts complying with NFCC. Grognard Chess (talk) Ping when replying 14:42, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just removed the table of excerpts and the copyvio notice. Grognard Chess (talk) Ping when replying 14:44, 11 December 2014 (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.