Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YesAllWomen

YesAllWomen

YesAllWomen (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)

Unnotable hashtag. fails WP:LASTING. Beerest 2 Talk page 12:45, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep Meets WP:GNG with international coverage in multiple well-known, widely distributed publications. Whether it has lasting effect is as yet unproven either way, but WP:LASTING is not a reason for deleting: "This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable." --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 13:26, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• too early to tell we need to wait a few months to see if this has had lasting effect. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• merge to 2014 Isla Vista killings as is already suggested. Mangoe (talk) 15:18, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• Keep. I really, really don't like the idea of full articles for individual Twitter hashtags. It is an abomination against all that is encyclopedic. However, this has satisfied the requirements of the GNG. If there's no lasting news coverage, then we can merge it into an appropriate article. Ask me again in six months how I feel about this article, and I might support a merge proposal. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• Keep Do not merge, as 2014 Isla Vista killings is already at a point where WP:SIZERULE, which is a guideline, recommends splitting out content, rather than folding new content in.This is a sensible editorial cut point for a spinout article whether or not it meets WP:GNG. (I happen to think it clearly does, as well.) --j⚛e decker^talk 15:55, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• Keep Do not merge or delete. While it started with the 2014 Isla Vista killings, the hashtag is now notable enough on its own through international coverage to warrant its own entry. --Smokebomb (talk) 16:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• Keep As noted in WP:LASTING, "It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable." Satisfies significant coverage from multiple reliable sources. Suggest wait and see. Lradon (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• Keep WP:LASTING is in direct conflict with Wikipedia:NTEMP. Bottom line is that this satisfies WP:GNG. End of story. And I strongly suggest everyone consider The Gender Gap on this one. --Theredproject (talk) 17:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• Merge into 2014 Isla Vista killings Fails to meet WP:LASTING on its own. Datavortex (talk) 17:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
• Weak keep Agreed with j⚛e decker. The subject has enough notability to be recognize with at least a lengthy section within 2014 Isla Vista killings, which is sort of has already, but the parent article is getting to the point where is should be split out anyway. - Shiori (talk) 18:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Theredproject (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2014 (UTC)