Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Putin khuilo!: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
'''Keep for now'''
No edit summary
Line 119: Line 119:
* '''Keep'''. Not as a song, but as a soccer fans chant. --[[User:Perohanych|Perohanych]] ([[User talk:Perohanych|talk]]) 18:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. Not as a song, but as a soccer fans chant. --[[User:Perohanych|Perohanych]] ([[User talk:Perohanych|talk]]) 18:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. Sufficient notability, also a major diplomatic bone, made the Urban Dictionary --[[User:Ilyaroz|Ilyaroz]] ([[User talk:Ilyaroz|talk]]) 18:23, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. Sufficient notability, also a major diplomatic bone, made the Urban Dictionary --[[User:Ilyaroz|Ilyaroz]] ([[User talk:Ilyaroz|talk]]) 18:23, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. It's certainly widespread by now, just one recent example from Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/06/16/khuilo-the-offensive-term-that-has-attached-itself-to-putin/]. [[User:Narking|Närking]] ([[User talk:Narking|talk]]) 18:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. It's certainly widespread by now, just one recent example from Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/06/16/khuilo-the-offensive-term-that-has-attached-itself-to-putin/]. It also has an entry in the Urban dictionary [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=huylo&defid]. [[User:Narking|Närking]] ([[User talk:Narking|talk]]) 18:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' Notable: (1) political context; (2) widespread popularity of this meme. There is a number of cover versions on Youtube. Currently search on Youtube for "Putin huilo" returns ~2000 results -- [[User:CaptSolo|CaptSolo]] ([[User talk:CaptSolo|talk]]) 18:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' Notable: (1) political context; (2) widespread popularity of this meme. There is a number of cover versions on Youtube. Currently search on Youtube for "Putin huilo" returns ~2000 results -- [[User:CaptSolo|CaptSolo]] ([[User talk:CaptSolo|talk]]) 18:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep for now''' This song seems to have caused a diplomatic incident. Due to the Foreign Minister singing it to stave off an angry crowd, the incident is actually very notable (a diplomatic crisis), even if the song is crass and not exactly a cleverly written poem. If you wanted to turn this into "Putin Khuilo diplomatic incident" that would be a compromise I would be willing to support. If it turns out that Putin Khuilo is the Ukrainian version of "[[Give Peace a Chance|All we are saying is give peace a chance]]" / "[[Make love, not war]]" then we would be silly to delete reference to it altogether, but for now it seems to be a fairly new chant that is definitely making a lot of news. Is there an article about [[Chants and slogans related to Ukranian and Russian conflict]], akin to [[List of Maoist China rhetoric and political slogans]]. Also, it might be informative for people to read the [[WP:RECENT]] essay and understand how wikipedia incorporates fast-moving news stories. Peace, [[User:MPS|MPS]] ([[User talk:MPS|talk]]) 18:51, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
* '''Keep for now''' This song seems to have caused a diplomatic incident. Due to the Foreign Minister singing it to stave off an angry crowd, the incident is actually very notable (a diplomatic crisis), even if the song is crass and not exactly a cleverly written poem. If you wanted to turn this into "Putin Khuilo diplomatic incident" that would be a compromise I would be willing to support. If it turns out that Putin Khuilo is the Ukrainian version of "[[Give Peace a Chance|All we are saying is give peace a chance]]" / "[[Make love, not war]]" then we would be silly to delete reference to it altogether, but for now it seems to be a fairly new chant that is definitely making a lot of news. Is there an article about [[Chants and slogans related to Ukranian and Russian conflict]], akin to [[List of Maoist China rhetoric and political slogans]]. Also, it might be informative for people to read the [[WP:RECENT]] essay and understand how wikipedia incorporates fast-moving news stories. Peace, [[User:MPS|MPS]] ([[User talk:MPS|talk]]) 18:51, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:59, 17 June 2014

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
What you mean "created by Ukrainians"? What if "created by niggas"? Are you Russist?--Dim Grits 17:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
discussion with sockpuppeter, now blocked
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
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)[reply]
The first edit of this user--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
posts by sockpuppeter, now blocked.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

+ IBTimes: [2], deutsche welle: [3]. --Jeromjerom (talk) 10:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

  • This template must be substituted.
    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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • Keep, more than 1 300 000 views of the video in 3 days https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kac73Ks_Yqo --Perohanych (talk) 13:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rediect to an appropriate location, for now. The WaPo link is a valid source, the claim above of "It's not a Washingtonpost article, but a personal blog" is false. The blogging sections of reliable sources, particularly newspapers, are no different from a journalist penning a regular column. The Guardian and Bloomberg also contain brief mentions of the song/chant directly. 1 solid source and a few name-drops (there are others such as the Independent) bring this pretty close to the notability threshold. Tarc (talk) 13:09, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (a redirect would be okay but I can't think of where at the moment). There's a chance this might become notable in the future but I don't think it's there yet. The vote-spam actually does more harm than good. Stlwart111 13:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: these words of the popular chants are widespread in the world, it is popular not only among football fans, but also among politicians. There are many references to authoritative sources.--Nikkolo (talk) 13:20, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:30, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment mostly agree with Tarc, but this is moving fast and likely has become notable already. It might be on the border now of being a single event - the comment at the embassy - but the phrase and the song are intertwined with that. WaPo, Telegraph, Independent, and Bloomberg are all reliable sources. The RFE article at http://www.rferl.org/content/putin-profanity-ukraine-deshchytsya/25425498.html almost pushes me over the edge. It's a more rounded article geographically and its video is about Kharkiv, not about the embassy in Kiev. BTW, before anybody uploads the video as PD-US Gov, you should check thoroughly if Commons policy does reflect that RFE is actually US GOV (it seems obvious but I know that there has been some discussion). In any case within a few days we'll know if this meme takes off or dies out as quickly as it came. Smallbones(smalltalk) 16:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]