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 Speedy delete as per WP:CSD A7. DES ^(talk) 05:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guy in Red/Blue Shirt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable web content hosted at YouTube. It's only been around since March 23 and there's no evidence of notability since then. This article has been deleted several times under speedy deletion. The creator of the article thinks I'm being unfair, so I'm bringing this hear for further review. Metros232 01:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, theyve been deleted all by you and the only way to get you to respond to your talk page is to resubmit it. BEsides, how do you know whats notable since them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by General reeves (talk • contribs)
  • Actually, no, it was deleted 4 times in total, twice by me at Guy in Red/Blue Shirt and twice by two separate admins at Guy in red/blue shirt. Metros232 01:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually yeah. I submitted them by accident when they just had a few sentances or were half fionished. Stop avoiding the question of how you know if its notable or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by General reeves (talk • contribs)
      • No, I just looked at the deleted versions, they're definitely the same as the article you've been adding here. I know it's not notable because of notability guidelines like WP:WEB. Metros232 02:02, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong speedy delete: A7. They're on YouTube. They post videos. That's all the article says that isn't links, original research, etc. No assertion of notability per WP:WEB (on the content) or WP:BIO (on the posters). --Kinu ^t/_c 02:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and Salt - non-notable Youtube skit, repeatedly deleted. --Haemo 02:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are tons of links! What do u mean by oroginal research?

We are well aware there are lots of links on that page - however, they are all just links to Youtube videos - that does not make them notable. And please read WP:OR for info about original research. --Haemo 02:09, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original research: there is no information anywhere about the style, trends, etc. in the videos. It's analysis of the videos after watching them, and posted here without any reliable sources.--Kinu ^t/_c 02:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I wont resubmit it. Besides, it is researched. I got it from the course, over MSN from guy inred/blue shirts. I dont get why you have to be so stingy. An article about "non notable" people doesnt bother anyone. It does nothing. It bothers no one. So why not keep it on? Its not nonsense or poorly constructed or anything. Free edited encylopedia? HAHA

It's free to edit - not free to add whatever you want to. Non-notable topics are not encyclopedic, and they compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia - and thus are deleted when noticed. --Haemo 02:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If we allowed anyone to add whatever they wanted without notability standards, every 7th grader who can type would have their own biography on Wikipedia. How is that helpful to our encyclopedia? Metros232 02:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What integrity are you talking about? It doesnt bother anyone. And what is with your 7th grader talk? There are Guy in Red/Blue Shirt on the internet, not random 7th grader Billy O'Toole. It helps because it adds even more information on this site.

The integrity of the project? You know, how we're trying to a make free reference encyclopedia here, and not a collection of non-notable trivia. And the seventh grader comment follows since any seventh grader can take a camera, record a dozen or so videos, upload them to Youtube, and then - by your argument - should get a Wikipedia entry. It would probably take me about a half-hour to do. Which is why we have notability standards for inclusion.

Also, there is inummerable information out there. Which is why we have the guidelines under WP:NOT to make sure it meets standards. --Haemo 02:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but you wanna know something totally crazy? This didnt take half an hour to upload everything.So judgin by your criteria, unless theyre in movies along with mel Gibson they shouldnt get an article either because theyre not notable? Ever surfed through everything on here? Most of these are people that no one has ever heard of

Please read WP:NOTE for the notability guidelines. --Haemo 03:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per why are they notable? the_undertow ^talk 02:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete again. Resolute 05:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not notable. I'd like to see a study to determine if there exists a correlation between the amount of comments in an AfD by an article's creator and the result of the discussion. I'm sure there is one. Maxamegalon2000 05:05, 29 April 2007 (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.