Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LUL (symbol)

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 redirect to LOL#Variants. Sandstein 07:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LUL (symbol)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

We have individual pages for emojis like Poop emoji et cetera, but thankfully we don't have individual pages for twitch emotes too.

Before asking for a Merge, check that TotalBiscuit#Internet popularity already has a line

In 2016, Twitch added a LUL emoji, sketched from a laughing Bain photo, which has since become one of the most popular emojis on that platform.

;which by all means is a generous summation of the nominated article. Nothing else really salvageable in the article. - Harsh (talk) 15:51, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. - Harsh (talk) 15:51, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. - Harsh (talk) 15:51, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Simply non-notable and fails GNG. There is not even an article about the widely-known "Kappa" emote so an article about this lesser-used emote seems even more minor. However, I would not be opposed to List of Twitch emotes as they have gotten not insignificant coverage as a whole._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:00, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Twitch (service)#Emotes. Not enough coverage about this very specific element. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 07:52, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and oppose merge, clearly exists as a standalone topic which has been the primary subject of numerous articles from reliable sources, such as [1] and [2]--Prisencolin (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You brought up two sources, Prisencolin. I know you know that's not enough for WP:SIGCOV and does not meet stand-alone notability. In the custom WP:VG/RS Google search engine, there are whopping total of 19 results. And starting from the fourth result ("Emotes Mocking Dr Disrespect Disappear From Twitch"), every usage of "omegalul" is in forum comments or listings of other articles. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 06:07, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The example you brought up about forum comments being used in articles doesn’t make the source unsuitable for usage. If Kotaku believes quoting these sources meets their journalistic standards, then I’d be inclined to agree. It’s an internet phenomenon, most of the rhetoric about it will be online. WP:RS discourages the use of forums to be used as a source directly in Wikipedia articles, but says nothing about forums being used as sources within the sources that Wikipedia uses. There is an additional degree of editorial discretion being applied here and that’s more than enough to use those sources in this article.—Prisencolin (talk) 20:14, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to ~~TotalBiscuit#Internet popularity (or Twitch (service)#Emotes)~~ LOL#Variants: Best to briefly discuss the term in any of the target articles. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 11:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DMySon 03:32, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changed redirect target, per Rhododendrites. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to LOL#Variants, where it is already mentioned. I see there are a few options for redirect. It's not mentioned on the Twitch article and a specific emote would probably be undue in that article. It's mentioned in the TotalBIscuit article, but for a redirect target let's go with the meaning of the concept. Not seeing sufficient coverage to justify a stand-alone article here. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:35, 25 July 2020 (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.