Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LUEshi (4th nomination)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 of the debate was No consensus, even after discarding votes.

R 09:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

LUEshi

This is the very definiton of cruft. The only assertion of notability is the fact that it was signed by Shigeru Miyamoto. Other than that, it's an unnotable internet meme Toffile 08:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing, Google isn't the deciding factor of what should be on Wikipedia.
Douglasr007 02:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
Let me clarify. My first thought was yes, merge it into GameFAQs message boards (heretofore referred to as GameFAQs). However, I went over to GameFAQs and noticed the article was already moderately long, and even if the whole article is not necessary for a merge, it would still account for a significant portion of the GameFAQs article. If there were a page such as GameFAQs fads, or something of the likes, I would say merge it into there, but I don't think that there are enough other fads to justify that kind of page. -J Train 03:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Protect. Message board fancruft, ONLY importance is on GameFAQs, the only group who primarily uses LUEshi is on GameFAQs. - Hbdragon88 21:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. This is getting insane. I'm predicting that this article will soon become a GNAA-type article, lots of AFD nominations (GNAA has eight AFDs as of this writing) but no deletions. Each AFD here keeps getitng shot down... - Hbdragon88 21:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Oh my, the LUEsers are up for it - I see a topic with 41 posts about this AFD nomination, plus two other topics about it. I don't know if this kind of effort was mobilized for the third nomination, but it's moving. And if this gets deleted, could it be protected? - Hbdragon88 22:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Is there some conspiracy to remove internet memes from Wikipedia we should know about? LUEshi is quote notable, with GameFAQs being one of the larger internet communities. Plus, its spawned its own sites and has been signed by Miyamoto. Quit trying to turn Wikipedia into an elitist encyclopedia under the guise of open source. SA9097
    • Comment.
      096 19:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply
      ]
  • Delete per nom, flood of meatpuppets. Request closing admin to check votes for contributions very carefully. Stifle 00:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • If I'm not mistaken (which I very well could be), this is to be decided not by the number of meatpuppets/sockpuppets, but by the number of and especially arguments presented by responsible users. -J Train 03:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Right. Let me clarify. The reason I've voted to delete is both that I agree with the nominator and that I instinctively vote to delete articles where a flood of "meatpuppets" (meaning new users, users with very few contributions, or unregistered users, no more and no less) contributes and asks to keep or "do not delete". My request was simply for the closing administrator to carefully check whether contributions from certain users should be discounted. Stifle 21:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete as a non-notable internet (site) slang. If I go to a website like this and enter in a picture then post it on a website like
    096 19:50, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I'm pretty sure that's how
Douglasr007 00:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
Yeah, your logic is pretty flawed. Maybe you didn't read the article, but this was actually a huge deal on GameFAQs and other places, such that users were banned or suspended for 2 months just for posting it once, and it's not anything shocking like tubgirl, goatse, etc. Your picture you've uploaded is just that; something of note to you, not a website with 3 million registered users and "hundreds of thousands times more hits than your personal website does". -J Train 03:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pfft. Nobody was banned for LUEshi. The worst I heard was purgatory, but that was pretty much brought on yourzselves by abusing it to the point of no return (i.e. Night of a Thousand LUEshis). Out of the 3 million registered GF accounts it was only a big deal to a few thousand, the LUEsers (22,000 as of ExcLUEsivity). Anyway, you're making it a strong canidate for merger - this did in fact was a big deal on GF, but can you prove it was a big deal elsewhere? - Hbdragon88 03:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my original idea was to merge, but I didn't think it was appropriate. Because I don't want to overload this page, please see my above reasons (under keep). -J Train 23:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It could be condensed down to a couple of paragraphs or two; it wouldn't be too hard. For instnace, before Cassandra de Vries was merged into Perfect Dark ( see its last edit before merger), that article was pretty long. But most of it was drivel and repetition from the main article. I could see LUEshi being condensed down to a small notation in the LUE section currently at the GFAQs message boards article. - Hbdragon88 04:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
096 03:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Strong Keep LUEshi is an important meme — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinyboy21 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • User's 5th edit. - Hbdragon88 02:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Should also be noted that one of said user's edits was a request to create an article for "luelinks.net".-J Train 03:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Two questions should come out of this whole discussion. First, are fads and internet memes noteworthy. Are they significant in the sense that anyone looking back years from now would even care? Probably not. Are they significant in the sense that someone might actually look up something like this for reference, yes, I've personally looked up the
    ORLY
    article myself to figure some things out. In discussing internet memes their inclusion may be inevitable in a community dominated by the internet.
The second question is whether or not it's possible to lobby wikipedia. Can a dedicated enough forum, which is all we're talking about here, defend an article or topic of their choice and promote it to notability? These votes suffer from a self-selection bias, the only people likely to show up are people who really want to defend the article, few people are likely to put the same effort into getting rid of it. But does this basically mean that a commmunity like somethingawful or slashdot can hold wikipedia articles hostage or dominate coverage of themselves and promote their topics? Aside from making votes like this more public or putting out an appeal to wikipedia that a message board or community is exercising undue influence, I'm not sure what we can do.--BigCow 09:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that, I, a LUEser, do not believe in the notability of this article, I think we can rule out the idea that any community can truly be solid on this issue. I think that notability of memes will establish itself, without the community's interference. - CorbinSimpson 03:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In the long run, almost certainly, just like in the long run any article tends towards being accurate since enough people will have had a chance to correct it. However, in the long run, we're all dead. The average VfD may have only dozens of users where as forums have hundreds of members at their disposal, we'll just have to trust that people in the community of wikipedia make wise judgements.--BigCow 20:55, 17 February 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/LUEshi_(4th_nomination)&oldid=1082181783"