Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WhatCulture

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 keep. Mz7 (talk) 07:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WhatCulture

[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)

Promotional article, requesting DRAFTIFY or deletion 1292simon (talk) 23:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't see how the article is promotional nor why it would need to be draftifyed. It covers the websites history, both its ups and downs and easily passes GNG based on the coverage in the article.★Trekker (talk) 23:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Quite a while ago there was a really concerted and annoying spamming effort to promote the ill-fated wrestling franchise on Wikipedia over a walled garden consisting of multiple spurious and over-elaborate articles that all got deleted. That is how this ended up on my watchlist. Even though that makes me instinctively suspicious whenever I hear mention of WhatCulture, I don't detect any of that nonsense here though. I see no indication that this article is intentionally promotional. What I do see is a subject that is borderline for notability. Many of the references are poor (primary sources, YouTube videos, etc) although a few are OK. The article almost exclusively focuses on the defunct wrestling franchise and controversy over the behaviour of a former employee. There is almost nothing about the site's current general operations. Is it over the line for notability? I'm not sure. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:17, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
possibly G5 eligible I nominated for CSD G5, but withdrew it, because I wasn't certain if the SPI had to show confirmed. However, whatever evidence it was, it was enough for the creator to be blocked. Please see User:KMWeiland. The puppeteer they are suspected of being has quite a handful of confirmed and suspected socks. Graywalls (talk) 00:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the article has been substantially edited by other people since so we should probably judge it on its current state. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep DanielRigal points out the troubled history here. This website is terrible and annoying and all of that awfulness has spilled out into our encyclopedia. But I don't think notability is a problem here. The article is in bad shape but we can't delete it because of that.LM2000 (talk) 22:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't like What Culture very much, but the article is well sourced with third party sources. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Also don't see how it is promotional. Can't find any promotional statements! There is enough news coverage to warrant a Keep. Expertwikiguy (talk) 18:15, 3 September 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.