Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Putin khuilo!

Putin khuilo!

Putin khuilo! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

A crystal clear case of WP:ONEEVENT, created by Ukrainians to retaliate for the Russian annexation of Crimea and invasion in Donbass. Ymblanter (talk) 09:57, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Note that the author of the paper once reverted the speedy deletion template and attempted to revert my AfD template.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• keep: It shouldn't be deleted as it's a popular international phenomenon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.29.143.51 (talk) 10:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• keep: Wikipedia has abundant coverage of e.g. World War II-era satirical songs that had just as much currency as this contemporary phenomenon from Ukraine. Hard to see how this is any different. It's well known, easy to source from across mass media, and has already played a part in a diplomatic kerfluffle. CRCulver (talk) 10:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC) — CRCulver (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  The first edit of this user--Ymblanter (talk) 10:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

discussion with sockpuppeter, now blocked
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
discussion has already passed! [1]. --Jeromjerom (talk) 10:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC) No.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC) Yes. These are two different processes - about the same! Consider and previous discussion! --Jeromjerom (talk) 10:18, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• keep: It shouldn't be deleted as it's a popular international phenomenon, there are already songs and international incidents associated with it, including one with the Minister of the Foreign Affairs. --Jeromjerom (talk) 10:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  CU-blocked for sockpuppeting. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Delete. We don't need articles about every insult that is hurled at a politician. SpinningSpark 10:22, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  This is not just a song, but also a meme. Besides authoritative enough. --Jeromjerom (talk) 10:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=huylo Urban Dictionary: huylo

  There is nothing about the song, only the word description. Vihljun (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/15/ukraine-minister-deshchytsia-abusive-putin-russia

  The song is not mentioned. The article is about Russian embassy incident. Vihljun (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/06/16/khuilo-the-offensive-term-that-has-attached-itself-to-putin/

  It's not a Washingtonpost article, but a personal blog.Vihljun (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-06-16/why-diplomats-curse-about-ukraine

  The article is mostly about Russian embassy incident, football chant is barely mentioned. Vihljun (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• http://politics.caijing.com.cn/2014-06-17/114270748.html

  The song is not mentioned. The article is about Russian embassy incident. Vihljun (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm Ukrainian, and as much as I want his arguments to be false, they are not. The notability does not settle in one day. Barvinok (talk) 11:51, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: this is definitely not a WP:ONEEVENT and the term was mentioned lots of times by different World medias. At this moment it is an important part of story and helps get proper understanding of events and people's reactions. --DimaV83 (talk) 10:26, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  The third edit of this user overall; the first one in 2014.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Delete: brings hatred among people (link already spreading), political insult, may harm people feelings. wiki is not a place for a fight — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arxcaeli (talk • contribs)

  if to follow your logic, then lets also delete page about Hitler, I'm sure, it brings hatred among neo-nazi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.49.208.82 (talk) 10:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

The first edit of this user--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: The words exist, the melody accompanying these words exists, performers are (still) alive, and, the reader has the right to know, what’s that all about. --Керди (talk) 10:39, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  Third edit of this user--Ymblanter (talk) 11:03, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  CU-blocked as a sock. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:51, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: The existing phenomenon is remarkable and it would be unfair to omit this knowledge. PositiveSky (talk) 10:53, 17 June 2014 (UTC) — PositiveSky (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  First edit of this user--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  Ymblanter, do not misinform the audience. I made many contributions in different language sections of Wikipedia.PositiveSky (talk) 11:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  Your contributions to other Wikimedia projects are commendable but are irelevant here since our policies are different from other projects. Additionally, you are participating in vote stacking.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  our policies has no interrelation with your slander that my account is single purpose. PositiveSky (talk) 11:36, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  First, I did not write it is single purpose. Second, one more usage of this language, and I will take you to ANI. Third, this is, after all, your first edit in the Eglish Wikipedia. You did not take time to read the policies, but came here from the external sites to vote keep does not matter what. Your vote does not even have traces that you read my nomination.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  Actually you wrote that. Check this words in the link given by you: few or no other edits. This is direct evidence of lie.

• Comment. The article is currently referenced to Ukrainian sources only, which makes verification of claims difficult and best left for Ukrainian-speakers (which I am not). A quick google search shows there should be English sources. I'll abstain from voting now, but if somebody adds English sources ping me and I'll see if they show notability. The fact that this AfD is now suffering from what seems to be SPA vote stacking and canvassing is not helping. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: the phenomenon has gained a considerable attention, including international mass-media reports and a diplomatic row making it relevant enough to be kept. As to the "temporarity" of the phenomenon - there is no way to say how long it will last until it ends. So far, the topic is important, well-sourced, has got a considerable attention and the article must be kept.--vityok (talk) 11:03, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  Fourth edit of this user in 2014--Ymblanter (talk) 11:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Comment. I do not have time to check the user contributions anymore, but I hope the closing admin will disregard the vote stacking.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  Quoting discussion template: "consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes." -- but obviously some users are trying to base it on 'contributions count' instead. What a nice new twist in continuing perversion of wikirules. 83.149.35.150 (talk) 11:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: There haven't been given any convincing arguments for the removal. --MelVic (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: this is definitely not a WP:ONEEVENT and a lots of people tries to find info about subject. Iomark04 (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

  Point being that the article subject is sensitive for both Russians and Ukrainians to a personal level, therefore they should abstain from voting Barvinok (talk) 11:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: song have become widespread political and cultural phenomenon, influencing on situation in the region.

For example, president of Chechnya promised "to bring ukrainians to their knees for this song".

• • http://instagram.com/p/pTroboCRmW/

There are also articles , on Wikipedia, on similar thematics, like "Der Fuehrer's Face"

• • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Fuehrer's_Face

92.49.208.82 (talk) 11:15, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Der Fuehrer's Face was an immensely popular recording (#3 on the U.S. charts) by a highly notable artist released by the most notable of record labels, still being discussed for its cultural impact 70 years later. I don't see logic to this argument at all. 78.26 (His Wiki's Voice) 12:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Delete as individually not notable, but likely usable in any article on Ukraine anti-Russian demonstration articles. Whether the article has any bias is irrelevant here - the problem is the song qua song simply fails notability guidelines on Wikipedia. AFAICT, the mentions are all in the larger context of demonstrations, and not strongly about the song itself. For example, the Guardian article is about a "chant" and abut a word one envoy used - not about a song, and absolutely not about a specific song to establish notability of the song. Collect (talk) 12:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
• Delete, as there cannot be any secondary sources able to judge the song's impact. The song's surrounding context is ongoing, so all sources are primary by definition, and we cannot predict whether solid secondary sources will be published at a later date. "Der Führer's Face" is notable because it's been discussed by secondary sources, which looked back at the song and could judge its impact from a distance, and such sources clearly can't exist yet for this song. Nyttend (talk) 12:10, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable. No evidence of song's impact. Way too soon to see if it's anything substantial. Please note that the outcome of this discussion will be based on strength of argument and not by popular vote so flooding it with supporters is a waste of time.Cowlibob (talk) 12:42, 17 June 2014 (UTC)