Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Bwithh (talk | contribs)
14,830 edits
adding warning tag
No edit summary
Line 49: Line 49:
*'''Super Keep''' - It's a very popular song. If we delete this song, then we have to comb through every single album ever released that's on here and decider which songs are 'notable' and which aren't - come the fuck on! Any song that at ANY point was considered notable, is notable. [[User:youaredj|youaredj]] 22:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Super Keep''' - It's a very popular song. If we delete this song, then we have to comb through every single album ever released that's on here and decider which songs are 'notable' and which aren't - come the fuck on! Any song that at ANY point was considered notable, is notable. [[User:youaredj|youaredj]] 22:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - It's a very popular video on the internet, and certainly deserves its own entry.
*'''Keep''' - It's a very popular video on the internet, and certainly deserves its own entry.
*'''Strong Kee''' - There is nothing wrong with it its not offensive or a stub

Revision as of 08:04, 10 September 2006

Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny

Wikipedia:Notability (web) has a footnote that explicitly states that content hosted on Newgrounds is not made notable by virtue of being distributed by that notable site. Unless this content recieved notable press coverage, I think that it fails all three tests on Wikipedia:Notability (web) and should be deleted, regardless of how cool or interesting it is to the group of people who like it. --Dwiki 06:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ultra-strong Keep - non-notable???? This song will more than likely be Dr. Demento's #1 request of 2006 (at 60 chart points, it's 22 points above the #2 song (My Cat is Afraid of the Vacuum Cleaner by Power Salad) right now, and there are only 2.5 months left in the chart period)! Sounds pretty notable to me. -- EmiOfBrie 12:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since when is Dr.Demento a valid yardstick of notability? wikipediatrix 15:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Since he became the most important DJ in his genre of music. WilyD 19:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also since, in the web notability guidelines linked above, item #3 states: The content is distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster. Demento certainly qualifies as a well known online (and real world) broadcaster, meeting the requirements for 'notability'. Sparkhead 19:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. D has many times told his listeners how he ranks songs, the chart is hosted by a third party, true, but it uses the same rank method Dr. D uses. -- EmiOfBrie 22:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, those numbers conk out after 600-or-so. The rest of the hits aren't unique ones. And the vast majority of these hits are from blogs such livejournal, deviantART, tripod, and other less-than-valid sources. wikipediatrix 15:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
600 unique hits is actually very, very high. Uniques are just counted out of the first thousand. WilyD 16:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently Dr.Demento and a bunch of "this flash is soooo awesome" mentions on teenage blogs don't impress everyone. wikipediatrix 18:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately this isn't Collection of things that impress everyone, but an encyclopaedia. It is the case that the vast majority of editors recognise this as a spectacularly obvious keep. The nom only says "It isn't notable for being on Newgrounds" which is clearly true (WTF is Newgrounds?) but it is notable for a host of other reasons, which have been expounded here. Nobody has addressed them (partially because it's impossible, I would guess) and nobody will. Later we can all recall this when someone puts Paraguay up for deletion as non-notable, and laugh at the parallels to this case. WilyD 19:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh please. Could you get any more hyperbolic? Paraguay has more going for it than Dr.Demento and a bunch of goofy blogs. wikipediatrix 19:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. It's actually pretty reasonable as both are "maximally encyclopaedic" and both have a "zero worthiness for deletion". No editors who's argued for deletion has advanced a single reason that isn't demonstratably false, and it's clearly impossible to do so. The article is verifiable and encyclopaedic. Arguing to delete this is just as absurd as arguing to delete Paraguay. WilyD 19:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete Fails WP:V and WP:RS[1][2]. Fails WP:WEB. Fails WP:MUSIC. Google hits results are sludgey flood of blog and forum posts which have little or no currency for Wikipedia article verification (and there are plenty of crappy flash animations on the web which get lots of links and ghits). The main claim the article has to legitimacy is that the subject has a "cult following" on the web. But no reliable, verifiable, independent, reputable sources have been offered to prove this. Bwithh 19:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay, I inserted the reliable, verifiable, independant, reputable source that had alredy been offered to prove this in as a reference. The articles passes your complaints (except maybe WP:MUSIC). Strong delete is an untenable position, would you consider putting in something more fitting? WilyD 19:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia article uses this as a source citation for its claim that USOUD "has gained a largecult following among web enthusiasts", but in fact the article says no such thing. It's an article about "animutation" in general, and only gives USOUD scant passing mentions. wikipediatrix 20:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fairly sure that's a reasonable paraphrase of the online buzz about the music on Ultimate Showdown has generated so many Lemon Demon CD sales that he doesn't have to get a "real job." - nor is scant an adjective that can reasonably be applied here. WilyD 20:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's not even close to a "reasonable paraphrase". Ask any PR agent, there's a world of difference between a "buzz" and a "large cult following", and you're still mixing up the song (and the CD it's on) with the flash animation anyway, they're two distinctly separate subjects which get rather blurred in this article. Lemon Demon don't even have their own article, so why should the video for one of their songs have one? The logical thing to do is to merge some of this info into the Neil Cicierega article, which already devotes a subsection to USOUD. wikipediatrix 20:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to reword it to better match the source, feel free. That's not really an AfD issue. Beyond that, presenting the inverse of WP:POKEMON isn't convincing. It is true that merge may be a tenable position (though certainly not needed, nor do I really see a point for it), but delete remains completely unsupportable. WilyD 20:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the Dr. Demento issue, and WP:WEB, let me reiterate what you so clearly ignored. From WP:WEB #3: The content is distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster. Demento certainly qualifies as a well known online (and real world) broadcaster, meeting the requirements for 'notability'. It isn't about where the item ranks on his charts. It's that fact that he is well known and distributing it, independent of the creators, on his show. Sparkhead 20:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're talking about the SONG. Dr. Demento plays the SONG. This article is about the FLASH VIDEO. wikipediatrix 20:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
They're beasts of the same spawn. They cannot be seperated. WilyD 20:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Um, no, the intro says "The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny, often shortened to Ultimate Showdown, is a Flash animation and music video." Period. It goes on to talk about Dr.Demento playing it, of course, which is precisely why I say the article is confused. Is the tail wagging the dog, or vice versa? Scraping together scraps of attempted notability for the song with scraps of attempted notability for the video can't be put together to build a notable Golem out of its parts. wikipediatrix 20:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you're trying to suggest the music video is disconnected from the song, you'll have to try a little harder. The internet phenomenon originated with a flash animation/music video but spread to other formats (such as radio) To suggest the script Shakespeare wrote for Hamlet is a seperate thing from review of the play based on performances, and that you can't cobble these together to establish a single notability would be just as untenable. WilyD 21:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your logic gets fuzzier and fuzzier the more you try to stubbornly maintain. Should I bother to explain why "Song is to its Music Video" is not the same as "Script is to its review"? Nah. There's no point. wikipediatrix 22:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Given that I said Song is to music video as script is to play I'm fairly sure that won't be necessary. WilyD 22:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just made the point moot...since apparently the song is more notable than the video, I changes the focus of the article's introduction to the song rather than the video. Hopefully that will stop this particular line of squabbling. -- EmiOfBrie 01:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Super Keep - It's a very popular song. If we delete this song, then we have to comb through every single album ever released that's on here and decider which songs are 'notable' and which aren't - come the fuck on! Any song that at ANY point was considered notable, is notable. youaredj 22:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - It's a very popular video on the internet, and certainly deserves its own entry.
  • Strong Kee - There is nothing wrong with it its not offensive or a stub
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ultimate_Showdown_of_Ultimate_Destiny_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=74867236"