Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead meat rank


 * 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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Dead meat rank

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This appears to be a dictionary definition (literally) that does not mention this meaning, bolted on top of some links, which are either already covered in existing summary articles, or just plain puzzling (Naruto?) I don't what the idea here is, but a viable article it ain't. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:54, 30 May 2019 (UTC) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:54, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * do you think this qualifies as a speedy deletion per A1? The context is utterly missing here. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not the best judge of CSD criteria, I'm afraid. If you think so, go for it. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 01:22, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually the context behind this unofficial term comes from the series of grounded videos created with Goanimate. In dead meat videos, the extremely severe card is referred to "gets in dead meat"/. So I think we should keep this page. Kaithehedgefox (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2019 (UTC)kaithehedgefoxKaithehedgefox (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * So there is a single, unofficial, proprietary instance of the term use, ever? And you take that as an inspiration to make an encyclopedic article and fill it with "examples" pulled out of thin air? Dude. This is not even on nodding acquaintance with the ballpark for notability and coverage. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 02:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, there is an example of this term usage. For instance, in the series of dead meat videos created with Goanimate, the F grade was once described as the dead meat rank. The ranks/ratings NC-17, AO, 18+, etc are akin to both the dead meat card and F. Which is why I think we should keep this page. Kaithehedgefox (talk) 17:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)kaithehedgefoxKaithehedgefox (talk) 17:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment A random kid playing pretend on YouTube saying a crudely-pasted Hammer Brother is awful and needs to be grounded for an entire geological era in a GoAnimate video is not a reliable source for anything. A little down the line you're going to realize this is definitely not a topic that deserves Wikipedia coverage. On top of that, any educational authority or person ever using this 'ranking system' would likely be fired and shamed in the news media, because you simply never threaten a kid with death for a low grade.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * As I've aforementioned, the term dead meat rank could not only be used for academic grading, but also for other sliding scale systems. One could actually exclaim "Oh no! It's Dead Meat!" when they see an NC-17 or AO rating. Another example is claiming that the difficulty very hard is a dead meat rank. Which is why it seems justified to keep this page. Kaithehedgefox (talk) 20:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)kaithehedgefoxKaithehedgefox (talk) 20:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment At this point I'm not going to continue any response to you, and judging from your talk page history, a bit of a break enforced by administrator action should be pursued. You're not only refusing to understand why your edits aren't standard here, but you're tilting at windmills.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 21:05, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete This is garbage from the Vyond (formerly GoAnimate) community involving the term "in dead meat", a popular cliche plot in that corner of the Internet where...well, I'm not going to bore anyone with the details (you'll see there are hour-long (!) YouTube videos about it in that link), but videos are made on Vyond about fictional cartoon characters (and yes...corporate logos. Please, don't ask) getting severely punished for bullying or just existing or something because an eleven year-old hates them. This is something Wikipedia doesn't need to have an entry on, and a G1 speedy would be supported as this is the very definition of 'patent nonsense'. And no, I don't know why parental ratings systems are 'see also's in the article.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 06:18, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonnnotable and nonencyclopedic. Trivialist (talk) 09:53, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete preferably speedily if it easily fits one of the criteria. Complete nonsense created by a user who seems to have a history of vandalizing.  Rorshacma (talk) 15:32, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Complete nonsense article. Definitely does not meet any criteria to be part of an encyclopedia. Spyder212 (talk) 14:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete As per WP:DIC --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 01:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 01:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 01:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, I see no sign of notability, not suitable for encyclopedia Alex-h (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is not encyclopedic. Cox wasan (talk) 18:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)


 * 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.