Talk:Kony 2012/Archive 1

Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because the Kony 2012 campaign and promotion thereof is an entity unto itself. The Wikipedia article on the campaign should be objective and informative, and should not be delete if it is just that.

Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because it simply requires expansion in order to explain the significant social/new media aspects of this campaign. This article has the propensity to become information, similarly to articles relating to Barack Obama's campaign for presidency (using social media, celebrities etc) — Precedingunsigned comment added by 58.6.186.197 (talk) 14:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion of Kony 2012
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because I am not affiliated with Invisible Children Inc., I simply saw the need for people to have a (although I admit, unpolished and vague) general idea about what Kony 2012 is. If I may, I request that the status of immediate deletion be removed and humbly ask that the community have a chance to expand it living up to Wikipedia's high standards.

More can be found on my talk page. Cmartincaj (talk) 14:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is quite notable. It is all over social media at the moment, and is just spreading. &mdash; Sentra246 (talk) 05:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has guidelines for notability. This doesn't meet it. It's just happened. Just because something has just happened does not mean it will have a lasting impact. Wikipedia is not a social network nor is it a newspaper ora method by which one promotes an idea.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if anecdotal evidence from a user if useful here, but I got here by googling 'wikipedia Kony 2012', specifically because I was looking for a netural point of view article on the campaign, and I was satisfied with what I read. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.19.57 (talk) 12:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because . &mdash;76.89.226.68 (talk) 05:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * See above. WP:NOTSOAPBOX, WP:NOTNEWS,WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK/WP:NOTFACEBOOK/WP:NOTTWITTER/WP:NOTLINKEDIN.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:RAPID See also: User:Dlugar/WP:NOTANTINEWS Nick1659 (talk) 06:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This is a video on the Internet, not an event. Also someone's random essay has no bearing.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 06:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could try reading the essay... Nick1659 (talk) 06:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is a new cause that is gaining popularity and will quickly become very important requiring a wikipedia page. &mdash; 71.236.202.104 (talk) 05:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Copying and pasting a hyperlink on every section to the rules doesn't make your anymore point valid.92.7.107.105 (talk) 22:08, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is a movement which allows people to be aware of the movement in support of the arrest of Joseph Kony. As the leader of the LRA, Joseph Kony has committed crimes such as murder, slavery, abduction, and rape against many people of Africa. The Kony 2012 section allows for this movement against Kony to be visible, and as the leading "encyclopedia" of internet, it is an absolute necessity for the article to avoid deletion.
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Does the page on Kony not allow enough visibility and information on Kony? I mean, it is the second result when you google "Kony". — Preceding unsigned comment added by75.92.160.60 (talk) 13:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because . &mdash; 153.106.190.114 (talk) 05:19, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because its very important. &mdash;58.178.144.220 (talk) 05:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because . &mdash; 99.232.148.153 (talk) 05:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because a organization such as wikipedia should understand and endorse movements like this just like the world supported the sopa and pipa movement. &mdash;98.110.121.46 (talk) 05:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because a organization such as wikipedia should understand and endorse movements like this just like the world supported the sopa and pipa movement. &mdash;98.110.121.46 (talk) 05:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because . &mdash;67.4.47.212 (talk) 05:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because as more people become aware of this article, It will quickly grow, and it is most definitely of utmost importance that this information, about such an important cause not be erased from one of the webs most visited site. If anything Kony should be the article of the day for a week to spread awareness. To delete this article is essentially telling those boys and girls, and their families, that we simply don't care, that their cause simply isn't important enough for Wikipedia to cover. Please, I a begging, pleading to leave this page up, if even for just a few months. We all need to unite around a cause and finally make a difference. Won't you come and join us, Wikipedia? &mdash; 98.111.238.148 (talk) 05:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a venue to promote a movement, no matter how altruistic it may be. Also, it does not currently meet our requirements for notability.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Its just about meets the guidelines on notability as it has third party sources. However it should be included in the main article onJoseph Kony as it fits best there as it is of relevance to that article.Nome3000 (talk) 05:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No it shouldn't.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Why is that? Nome3000 (talk) 06:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it's not notable for inclusion at all and coming to this page instead of Talk:Joseph Kony to request its inclusion on the other article is inappropriate.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 06:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * OK. I get that you think this not notable. That is fine, I have no issue with you disagreeing with me. But I've asked you so many times now to be specific as to why its not notable and every time you've just said 'because it's not'. It has third party reference as well as its social network saturation. If you can prove its not notable that is fine, although it would appear that is becoming more difficult as time goes by. As for suggesting its merger into another article as it doesn't merit an article by itself is hardly inappropriate if that article is very much related. Perhaps a merger with Invisible Children Inc would be more suitable but either merger would make sense at this time.Nome3000 (talk) 14:08, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is important for the survival of humanity as we know it to let the world know the truth. &mdash; 202.138.42.82 (talk) 05:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Suggested Merge/Redirect
I suggest the page be merged/redirected to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Children_Inc.

The page in question describes something that currently does not have notability (as a stand-alone article), but may be more appropriate and informative as a section or subsection of the Invisible Children Inc. article.

A redirect may also serve to discourage a re-creation of this page should it be deleted.

ShiroNoOokami (talk) 07:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with a Merge/Redirect to Invisible Children Inc . Nford24 (talk) 20:42, 7 March 2012 (AEST)
 * I would like to third this. 75.92.160.60 (talk) 13:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * yes this is absolutely the best way to handle this. It is likely some people may come to wiki to look for information about this. for the various policy reasons already stated by others, this is not notable enough yet and wiki isn't the place to promote it. Move the information the invisible children page and redirect this over there Smitty1337 (talk) 13:43, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose There are more than 20 mainstream news sources covering this now. Its notability is quite evident. Silver  seren C 18:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

This is the wrong place to be talking about this. For the discussion of the deletion of the page please see Articles for deletion/Kony 2012.  ·Add§hore·  T alk T o M e ! 23:55, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (your reason here) --130.209.241.193 (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Strongly Support Deletion
Obviously an advertisement, and this thing hasn't even been around for very long. You can't just create a wiki page the second something goes viral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by70.24.167.8 (talk) 12:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed. 91.153.61.213 (talk) 13:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The whole point of Notability is that you create articles after they become Notable, not create them before in the anticipation that they will in due course. See WP:WEB - specifically No inherent Notability. By all means save the content locally (i.e. on your own computer), but wait until the video is talked about by multiple, independent, reputable (probably offline) sources on multiple separate occasions (as opposed to just a couple of paragraphs tucked away on page 36 of a midweek edition of a newspaper). Even if it's the number one trend on Twitter, has millions of Facebook Likes and a corresponding number of +1s, it doesn't count as notable until it's spread further than social media - if Mrs. X who's never used social media in her life and doesn't have friends / family that use social media has heard about it, then it may be Notable based on where she heard about it (i.e. gossip - no, national news bulletins - maybe). Mittfh (talk) 14:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This article currently has many third party references, which make it conform to the notability guidelines, not just its social network popularity. Please see the reference section.Nome3000 (talk) 16:45, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

So many contested deletions...
Just my tuppence worth, and please pardon my French, but fucking hell... Why are there so many contested deletions?! This article has potential. I don't think it's an advertisement in any way, shape or form, and I'm certain it meets the general notability guidelines. Again, just my tuppence worth, your input on this is very welcome.  The Toxic Mite 't 14:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The faster that ugly deletion tag can be removed from the article the better! 80.42.230.215 (talk) 22:39, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DON'T DELETE
Over 7million views within hours of being uploaded. Plastered over every site I've been on in the last few hours, including Facebook. It's notable. Cross Pollination (talk) 18:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't make it notable. --24.89.89.234 (talk) 20:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * No, but the 7,000,000 figure does lend to its notability. A quick Google News search for "Kony 2012" (http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=nws&q=kony+2012) reveals it's a very popular video with major news sources covering both the campaign, the video, and the organisation itself (Invisible Children, Inc.). There are plenty of Wikipedia articles on less "notable" subjects/events/places/etc. I strongly oppose the deletion of this article. 80.42.230.215 (talk) 22:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Won't somebody think of the children!??!?!?
It's amazing how many people still let their emotions sway their better judgement.

It's not notable for the many reasons stated. Wikipedia isn't a newspaper, nor should articles remain just because people feel strongly about it.

--24.89.89.234 (talk) 20:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article is more than fit to stay on Wikipedia, and we all know it. The pretentious middle-class Wikipedians need a slap.92.7.107.105 (talk) 22:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
It's so tempting to join in... This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it is important for the survival of humanity as we know it to let the world know the truth. 109.113.230.139 (talk) 22:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
Not only is the video itself extremely popular, the campaign is being widely covered in the news. There are a great deal of articles on Wikipedia documenting people/campaigns/events/etc. of less notability. For this reason, I strongly oppose the deletion of this article.80.42.230.215 (talk) 22:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it's not the first article about a Youtube video. Why would you keep the article on "Charlie Bit my Finger" and delete that? 70.83.117.35 (talk) 22:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion - news coverage

 * Stop Kony, yes. But don’t stop asking questions -The Independent
 * Uganda: Invisible Children's Jason Russell on KONY 2012 - AllAfrica
 * Make Kony Famous - Sydney Morning Herald
 * Australian support amasses for Kony 2012 - NineMSN
 * Kony 2012: Invisible Children Documentary Sheds Light On Uganda Conflict - The Huffington Post
 * Internet campaign backing the arrest of Ugandan military leader, Joseph Kony, becomes online hit - The Voice Online
 * KONY 2012: Campaign shedding light on Uganda conflict an online success - Metro
 * Stop Kony: Invisible Children’s ‘Kony 2012’ to Find Justice for Child Soldiers - International Business Times

... Someone posted these a while ago. I'm pretty sure we can agree it's "notable" now. 80.42.230.215(talk) 22:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Keep
Why would you want to get rid of this? — Preceding unsignedcomment added by 109.175.251.98 (talk) 23:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contested Deletion
Do not delete this page. The subject is highly notable. Even if the page has problems, if it is deleted it will eventually have to be recreated, due to the subject's widespread interest. It would be better to keep the page and gradually fix any remaining problems.Fortpinepitch (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)