Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension

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 merge to Alt-right#Reactions. There is reasonably clear consensus that the chrome extension is not notable enough for a stand-alone article. Consensus also appears to be converging towards a merge outcome. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop Normalizing Alt Right Chrome extension

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

This has been PRODed and deproded twice, and the deproding rationales seem to be in conflict, so I'm bringing it here. Yes, the extension has received some media coverage, but all of it was at the end of November, around the time of the release, and it has received none since. The coverage has not been sustained, and while the phrase "stop normalizing" has become much more used since the 2016 US election, I don't see any evidence that the group behind this extension or the extension itself received more than its 15 minutes of fame. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:59, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I would support deletion because firstly the article is extremely short and it doesn't really explain what the extension did, you have to go to the references for that, secondly, it could be easily incorporated into the criticism section of the main alt-right page which would also reflect its notability and finally because all of the references are from one date meaning that it could be described at best as a short social movement and at worst a fad. DrStrauss talk 19:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DrStrauss: This article is long enough and definitely passes the A3 criteria for speedy deletion. Also, I added what the extension did. Also, if one included all the criticisms of the alt-right movement, that section would be impossibly long. Also, it doesn't matter if the refs are all from one date. It really doesn't. Also, see my keep vote. (Also also also) RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 19:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RileyBugz: while it may pass A3 it is still only three lines long which would add a paragraph to the alt-right movement page which is less than impossibly long at any stretch. The "all one date" criticism wasn't meant as a specific reason as to why it should be deleted but more for its lack of notability - it has had fifteen minutes of fame and those minutes can be incorporated into hours of the alt-right criticism page. DrStrauss talk 19:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DrStrauss: Can you please give me a specific reason why the article should be deleted? It would be preferable if you could tell me either why deleting this article would benefit the encyclopedia or what notability guidelines it violates? Thanks! RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 19:59, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RileyBugz: the article's content is notable but the content itself does not warrant an article in itself. Users reading about criticisms of the alt-right would be better equipped to get this information as a paragraph in that section as opposed to having to navigate to a short stub. A redirect can be left for those who are looking for it specifically. Cheers DrStrauss talk 20:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Although the article isn't written very well, the subject is definitely notable, it passes WP:WEBCRIT and WP:GNG. It does need to be expanded though. RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 19:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RileyBugz: I can write up a draft of an updated reactions section in the alt-right page if it'd be of use? DrStrauss talk 10:39, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Blow it up and start over - The article as it is doesn't have any useful encyclopedic content. The article as it is is crud. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – unsustained coverage and a few minor news articles. This is a good example of why we need A7 for software. Laurdecl ^talk 06:06, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I doubt coverage will be sustained but I'm just not seeing how this doesn't meet the WP:GNG (and there's no reason to rush to delete). Certainly substantial coverage in dozens of reliable sources, including Mashable, NBC News, Huffington Post, the Next Web. I' not aware of any policy that supports deletion, and remember WP:NOTPAPER. The main argument against keeping is WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, but this isn't a "routine" event, and it may be premature to assess whether coverage will be sustained. FuriouslySerene (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)Merge to Alt-right per Northamerica1000. This is the most sensible solution since this article is likely to never grow any further. FuriouslySerene (talk) 22:41, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Alt-right § Reactions, which presently has no mention of this. This will improve the merge target article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:15, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Alt-right § Reactions per Northamerica1000. This article brings up criticism of the "Alt-Right" without anything else that justifies its own article. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 05:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 07:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 07:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 07:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Alt-right#Reactions. The coverage seems to be mostly in terms of the alt-right itself, and it's mostly announcements that this exists, not in-depth analysis. Compare to something like Adblock Plus, which gets continuing coverage, like this article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:30, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Alt-right#Reactions. This seems broadly like a sensible solution. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:24, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge or Rename with a Redirect: the information in the article is helpful. If the article needs to be improved, improve it. Or perhaps just make the article on the "stop normalizing" group, which has a website, facebook page and twitter feed. Especially since there is now a version of the extension for Firefox. Beth Wellington (talk) 22:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as the nominator, I'm fine with the merge per Northamerica1000's arguments. Since there are still delete !votes out, this doesn't count as withdrawing, but I did want to note it for the closer. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:29, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 23 January 2017 (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.