Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haliey Welch


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ but move to Hawk Tuah Girl and make it primarily about the meme rather than the person. This is one of those strange discussions where everybody essentially agrees (or at least doesn't disagree) on that facts but reaches different conclusions about the outcome. There's agreement that there is enough sourcing. There's agreement that this source concerns an otherwise low-profile living person who is only known for one event. There's agreement that this doesn't mean that the event itself (the 'Hawk Tuah' meme) can't be notable even if the subject isn't. The !votes are pretty much equally split and pretty much equally policy-based, so that doesn't get us anywhere. The only path I can chart through this is to base the outcome on the following observations:


 * 1) There is no consensus for outright deletion
 * 2) There is a consensus that if the current subject is notable, she is only notable for one event
 * 3) Editing the article to adjust its scope would address this and is therefore preferred to deletion

–&#8239;Joe (talk) 13:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Haliey Welch

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Latest viral meme, very WP:BIO1E. WP:TOOSOON to tell if this is lasting. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Language, Entertainment,  and United States of America. UtherSRG (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  16:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: there are several internet celebrities and personalities with their own articles. Ben76266 (talk) 18:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draft: I guess, this is likely TOOSOON, but it's got decent enough sourcing. Time will tell if it's notable or not. Oaktree b (talk) 16:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I am amenable to this WP:ATD. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:47, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Why did you copy my draft? I created this page first User:UtherSRG Comintell (talk) 18:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry confused you with User:BullDawg2021 Comintell (talk) 19:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I created the draft first Comintell (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I had no idea that you also created a draft. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete or Draftify per nom - WP:BIO1E, but possible WP:TOOSOON. KylieTastic (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I created this article first and it's already in drafts and was submitted to AfC. Edit history proves I created the draft first. It's current in draft space. user basically copied my draft Comintell (talk) 19:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * As Comintell did create first at the article is now a copy-paste of that draft Draftify no longer makes any sense. Also I agree if kept it should be as "Hawk Tuah" not Hailey/Haliey Welch, and as BullDawg2021 has accepted Comintell as the creator it would be best to delete this as move Draft:Hailey Welch to Hawk Tuah to keep creator attribution. KylieTastic (talk) 09:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. Her name is Hailey Welch, and I created this page fitst and submitted through AfC. Draft:Hailey Welch
 * The user paraphrased much of my draft, and changed the name because my draft already existed. THIS is incredibly disingenuous.
 * To clarify. If you read my draft, I think you will see that Welch DOES qualify for notability, specifically because of sustained significant coverage over the last month, and her pivioting into a career and getting mentored by Shaq. I can't believe this UtherSRG basically copied my draft and moved it to mainspace with a spelling error in the name Comintell (talk) 18:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Super suspicious that this article says "Often misspelled as Hailey Welch" When All reliable sources cite her name to be Hailey Welch Comintell (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Please go to her social medias. Her name is Haliey Welch. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 *  Rdirect or merge: to Draft:Hailey_Welch: I created this page first. Technically this qualifies as speedy delete under WP:A10 Comintell (talk) 19:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * As can be seen by the edit history on this article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haliey_Welch&action=history the page was created 13 minutes after I created the inital draft:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Hailey_Welch&action=history Comintell (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Please assume good faith. I had no idea you created a draft. Also, you spelt her name wrong. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Where is your source for this? My article was much more detailed. You literally copied the same flow of facts as I did. What source spells her name this way. Every single reliable source says her name is Hailey. Sure I will assume good faith, but you shouldn't have been permitted to create this article Comintell (talk) 19:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Please calm down. Her name is Haliey Welch. You are blowing this way out of proportion. I did not copy you. BullDawg2021 (talk) 19:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * To the both of you: there are established procedures in place to preserve the page histories and authorial credits. If this article is kept and you continue the article improvement process, both of you should receive the appropriate credits for things like DYK, etc.  I suggest you put aside your differences and work together, not against each other. Viriditas (talk) 20:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Both of you need to stop edit-warring on this article. jp×g🗯️ 06:38, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep. Absurd as it may seem, the phenomenon has started to gather coverage in reliable sources and move from mere Tiktok gag into a Let's Go Brandon-style cultural moment. Here's eg Slate, 7News, Rolling Stone. That said, this likely belongs under Hawk Tuah, not under Ms Welch's name. Jpatokal (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Keep - Keep per Jpatokal, or redirect to either Zach Bryan or Shaquille O'Neal. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Please see my comment in the discussion Comintell (talk) 22:47, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Reply -, come again? --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - Even if the meme is receiving media coverage, one single TikTok meme is hardly enough to provide notability for a person. WP:1E comes to mind as this person really has no other claims to notability. Di (they-them) (talk) 04:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete or Draftify: There is not only the fact that the nominator is correct, there are two "competing" drafts, both containing overlapping information. Since it is WP:TOOSOON both draft creators should work together in Draft space to create one draft which may become appropriate to accept when the subject meets WP:BIO which I am not persuaded thsat it does currently 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be opposed to that. BullDawg2021 (talk) 06:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yea, @BullDawg2021 I'm sorry that I got so protective and frustrated. Even assuming good faith, this was a frustrating experience for me and I'm sorry if I came off as aggressive or un collaborative. Comintell (talk) 06:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment on the purely clerical issue here: there seem to be two pages here, Draft:Hailey Welch (created 2024-07-02T20:47:03) and Haliey Welch (created 2024-07-02T21:54:54‎). The overlap between both articles is fairly significant. I don't know to what extent one was copied from the other, but it seems like this may be worthy of later consideration in some other venue (assuming this is kept, otherwise there is no point). jp×g🗯️ 06:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notable for making a joke on a street interview? This is the epitome of people notable for only one event. It's possible the event (the joke itself (Hawk Tuah)) is notable, though even that is too soon to tell imo.  ato — mic  06:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Reminder: There are two issues at play here, whether the "Hawk Tuah" event meets WP:GNG (based on the amount of reliable sources garnered, probably yes) and whether Ms. Welch herself is notable (probably no, it's hard to dispute that this is WP:BIO1E). If you're suggesting that this article be deleted entirely, please clarify your stance on both these points. Jpatokal (talk) 09:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO1E Celjski Grad (talk) 09:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: Creating an article for the notable controversy or Hawk Tuah event will solve this problem. Clearly, this is a problem of WP:TOOSOON for the subject, as well as WP:BIO1E. In such a situation, there is only one way out–having an article about the popular word, "Hawk Tuah", and the influencer (not yet meeting WP:ENT) will redirect to the article. We don't need to argue on an article and a existing draft; it isn't necessary here. Who can/will create the event's article, and save us this stress? Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 11:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with this. The person herself obviously falls under WP:TOOSOON (WP:1E), but an article about the phenomenon/trend is much more suitable. There's definitely enough coverage in WP:RS for this. I think a lot of people voting delete here are simply saying WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Many TikTok trends (no exception here) do receive lots of reliable media coverage and do meet WP:NEVENT/GNG. I hope editors start to realize this — it's not 2010 anymore.  C F A   💬  01:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * 2010? Hilarious. "Every generation thinks they invented sex".  I created the article on Pinky the Cat a viral video from 1992. Viriditas (talk) 01:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Comintell, why not create the event with this energy of dragging having your draft and a post mainspace move by another editor? Safari Scribe <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Edits! Talk! 11:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Of course it is notable. Publish the story, under EITHER title to eventually be personalized if she becomes more famous. Thank you, either way likely a Hawk Tuah page is indeed coming to Wikipedia, especially if this story expands further. Thanks again, can't wait to see the page that IS coming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.137.161 (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article is well-cited, subject is notable.  I get that memes are not the most encyclopedic topic, but this one definitely meets the criteria at WP:SIGCOV. 162 etc. (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is nothing notable about this subject.  I watched the original video, the interview, and read the sources.  There is literally nothing there.  Her entire claim to fame consists of expressing her enthusiasm for fellatio.  That's it, nothing else.  I watched her entire interview that was published the other day, hoping for something, anything, that I could glom onto and say, that's something we should have an article about.  There's nothing.  She likes to use saliva as lubrication during oral sex.  That's the entirety of her notability. Now, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, and she seems like a very sweet young lady, but how do we write a biography about this?  We can't. Viriditas (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The criteria for deciding notability is WP:GNG, not WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Jpatokal (talk) 21:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I didn't say I didn't like it. I said there's nothing encyclopedic about the subject.  The entire article is a promotional advertising campaign for Welch by her management team who are trying to capitalize on a five second joke she told on social media.  This has the longevity of a mayfly.  She isn't notable for doing anything. Yes, the video went viral, but Welch was only one of a dozen random subjects interviewed by Tim & Dee TV, which itself isn't even notable. There's nothing here.  Nobody will know who she is next week. Viriditas (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The articles written about her by The Guardian, Vanity Fair, People, Forbes, etc. etc., will certainly still be there next week. A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. 162 etc. (talk) 22:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Warhol was right: "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes." Welch even alludes to that in the Guardian article.  There's nothing here to write about. "Haliey Welch is a young woman who was randomly interviewed in the middle of the street and made a joke about fellatio.  A video of her went viral, and she was soon approached by an agent who sought to capitalize upon her sexual-themed joke by making clothing with her name on it."  That's what we're doing now? Viriditas (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * All of this coverage calls her 'Hawk Tuah Girl'. Unless she starts a show, becomes a musician, etc, and receives coverage unrelated to Hawk Tuah, this is WP:1E  ato — mic  23:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Viriditas's prediction "Nobody will know who she is next week" (above) is commendably free of hedging, obscurantism, waffle. Let this AfD run on until next week, and then reconsider. The article will then live or die; either way, this AfD (with its miscellaneous expressions of indignation) will survive "for ever". -- Hoary (talk) 22:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I want a "like" button, @Hoary!!! 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The early filmmakers of the 20th century and the former journalists of MTV News would like a word. The topic of media preservation is one of the most depressing ever.  Nothing lasts, everything fades away.  Consider, if you will, the Silurian hypothesis.  In the far future, nobody will ever know you or I existed. People like to think they are making their lasting mark on the world, but it's a bedtime story we tell ourselves to keep the terror of the dark at bay. Viriditas (talk) 21:09, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. We've kind of got two subjects there: 1) Haliey Welch and 2) the Hawk Tuah meme. There's already a lot of good coverage and it's highly likely coverage of one or both will be lasting. There's something notable here. Similar memes and figures that come to mind are The Crazy Nastyass Honey Badger and Jenn Sterger. Tiffany Gomes, aka the "Crazy Plane Lady", is still getting coverage a year after her initial internet meme moment. Surprised there isn't an article about her. Probably should be. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Jenn Sterger's article is a biographical page discussing her successful careers in television, modeling, and writing. Where is the comparison? <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 03:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Read the article.
 * "Sterger and Catherine Perry (who later gained fame in WWE under the ringname Lana) were among a group of friends called the FSU Cowgirls, known for wearing skimpy clothing and cowboy hats to football games. She first came to attention when she was shown during a 2005 Florida State–Miami football game televised on ABC Sports. On seeing the shot, announcer Brent Musburger commented on-air that "1,500 red-blooded Americans just decided to apply to Florida State.""
 * She gained fame in a similar manner to Haliey Welch. RTredwell (talk) 14:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Point being? Jenn Sterger actually went on to become a notable person in her own right. If she and her friend were only known as "the FSU cowgirls", a subject that has no article on the encyclopedia, neither she nor her friend would have articles either. Sterger has an article because she gained further notability as a journalist, television personality, and model, enough to justify a BLP page. This article is just the short story of how someone's impromptu joke became a viral moment and she quickly cashed in and got to hang out with a few celebrities as a result. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 15:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You asked what the comparison is, I explained it to you. RTredwell (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * RTredwell, yeah, thanks for your explanation. That was my thinking. Obviously Sterger has had something of sustained notable career, and it's too early to tell if Welch will. But it's worth noting that the article for Sterger was created on February 11, 2006, before she had had much of that career, and after she was known almost entirely for being a memetic hot chick who happened to get on national TV at a football game. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete Too soon; for now, likely fleeting WP:BLP1E. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify and move to the incident rather then the person to comply with WP:BIO1E -1ctinus📝  🗨  21:37, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete and adding that if this page is kept in any form, it should be exclusively about the meme, not the person. The person is not a suitable subject for a biographical article. This is a textbook example of WP:BLP1E. The meme itself is highly unlikely to have any enduring notability. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 02:54, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * also feel like it's worth noting this may be a rare example of a situation where WP:NOTNEWS (WP:ENDURING) is actually potentially applicable in a deletion discussion. A significant percent of what's here is just a description of the subject's fifteen minutes of fame, just listing out every time the subject has appeared near another celebrity in the last few weeks. There's not exactly a lot of encyclopedic material to salvage here. Should also mention that not all of the sources in the article are quality sources. There's a handful of reliable ones, but TMZ, Times of India, Dexerto, and Distractify are not. I'm not convinced a page about the meme itself is justified. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 04:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Why do you think the meme is unlikely to have any enduring notability? What makes you think you can predict what will be popular in the future? It's impossible to predict the future. RTredwell (talk) 04:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It's WP:TOOSOON to properly assess if it meets the criteria on enduring notability, too soon for this to be a mainspace article. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 04:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That said, I agree with LilianaUwU's comments below that draftifying can be an acceptable outcome, too. I don't think this page is ready to be in mainspace. But it is not impossible that the meme/catchphrase could be article-worthy at some point in the future, and there's no harm in incubating it in draftspace as a work-in-progress. The page will need a lot of reworking, anyways; there seems to be little disagreement that the page should just be about the "hawk tuah" phrase — this cannot exist as a BLP page about Haliey Welch. Consider this a delete as first preference, draftify as second preference !vote. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 00:39, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep. or merge into an article about the meme itself if it does not meet notability guidelines for a biography. The meme has gained massive coverage and notability, and this article cites numerous reliable secondary sources. Thousands of people are looking up Hawk Tuah Girl daily looking for a Wikipedia article on the subject, they should be provided with one. RTredwell (talk) 03:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete : Definitely the case of WP:BLP1E and may be WP:TOOSOON at best. So I'd suggest to delete this and see this notability is sustained, but definitely delete for now. Coderzombie (talk) 06:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - Whether we like it or not, she is notable per WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Extensive and continued media coverage as well.BabbaQ (talk) 21:01, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete (or draftify, see below) per common sense, and the ten-year test. No one will remember this in 10 years.  Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 21:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * With that said... I'd be down with the idea of having an article on the meme rather than the woman behind it, considering BLP1E and all that. The meme has gotten loads of coverage and will be remembered. So... perhaps draftify, maybe?  Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 00:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - We are not here to judge worthiness; we are here to judge whether a topic has been the object of multiple, independently-published, instances of significant coverage in sources which are presumably reliable. This fits the bill. GNG pass from sources showing in the footnotes. Carrite (talk) 22:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Extensive media coverage. Too soon to delete; nominator's argument that this will not have lasting notability is WP:CRYSTALBALL. —Lowellian (reply) 00:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Move to Hawk-Tuah I think it's pretty clear that WP:BLP1E applies to Hailey Welch's article since well they are famous for one thing and one thing only as of the present day, most of the coverage is in the context of the meme not the person itself and I think we should have a article about the meme rather than the person themselves. <b style="color:#795cb2;">Sohom</b> ( talk ) 13:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment Anyone considering whether to keep or delete this page, should look at the original draft, Draft:Hailey Welch which has been expanded is formatted properly.
 * Comintell (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Come on. The problem isn't with the formatting, it's with the article being about the person rather than the event.  Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 23:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * As my draft was updated to note, she is in talks to get a reality TV show about her life, and further, the Hawk Tuah phrase origins are disputed, with many sources citing that Welch is garnering interest as an individual and public figure. I was just saying. Comintell (talk) 00:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete Maybe recreate this if the news is somehow still obsessed with her in a few months. I'm pretty sure there's just going to be a deluge of articles for the next few days and then none at all. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 01:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep This girl is essentially Bhad Bhabie/"Cash Me Outside Girl" (who unfortunately also recently made tragic news) for Zoomers instead of Millennials. She is more notable than some other articles.-- <b style="color:DarkGoldenRod;">~Sıgehelmus♗</b><b style="color:CornflowerBlue">(Tøk)</b> 02:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO1E. Zinderboff(talk) 06:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep - Hailey has a fair amount of coverage in reliable sources (see USA Today, Rolling Stone & The Guardian) and has already collaborated with Shaq and Zach Bryan. She gained online virality in a similar fashion to Gorilla Glue Girl, Bhad Bhabie, and Jenn Sterger - with Sterger also discovered from a passing comment made in a vox pop. While WP:CRYSTALBALL is always a fair argument to suggest she won't forever be notable, it can also be used on the contrary, as this may just not die down any time soon. If there is still not enough supporting evidence for Welch to have her own article, then the video should be the subject instead, e.g. "Looking for a Man in Finance" and Chewbacca Mask Lady. But not delete. --Mechanical Elephant (talk) 23:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep there are plenty of reliable sources and flash-in-the-pan memes get articles due to proper sourcing all the time, such as rizz or gyatt XanderK09 (talk) 20:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The problem here is that the article is about the person, not the meme. Since the person is only notable for the meme, she falls under WP:1E.  C F A   💬  03:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Worst case scenario, move the article to Hawk Tuah and redirect Haliey Welch to it. But I think it's pretty clear that we're at the point where Welch herself is notable.  See Tay Zonday / Chocolate Rain. 162 etc. (talk) 19:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Please note that WP:BLP1E lists three criteria, all of which are required for deletion. Please address the actual criteria rather than merely WP:VAGUEWAVE "per BLP1E". Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen&times; &#9742;  14:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep I feel like this might be of some importance as we have articles on stuff like "your mom jokes" and stuff Thehistorianisaac (talk) 04:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. This is a clear BLP1E situation. The coverage of the individual is because of the video, the person absolutely is still a low-profile individual (assuming she's going to successfully parlay this into wider fame is impossible to say at this point), and point three doesn't particularly apply to this (if it's about the meme, she would be a footnote in the article.) "Subsequent" developments like her finding representation or starting her own company are still in relation to being the "Hawk Tuah Girl". The best you could argue is the meme should have its own page, but this bio ain't it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs  talk 20:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep I think at this point there's clearly enough references and global news articles defining her as a notable person, and just based on the interviews she's done over the past week or so, she's clearly got plans to stay in the public eye. I would suggest a cleanup however. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 18:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify the page until enough time has passed to assess whether sustained notability exists beyond the initial viral meme phase. The focus should be on documenting the Hawk Tuah meme rather than emphasizing Hailey Welch, unless she achieves broader recognition and is demonstrated to be notable through continued media coverage. Ynsfial (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep // Gargaj (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain why you think this should be kept?  ato — mic  00:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:BLP1E. Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, the person is likely to remain a low-profile individual, and the event (a TikTok interview that went viral) is not significant. Zacwill (talk) 02:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete. Echoing what other users have pointed out, the subject of the article is known only for one thing. Unless the subject gains notability in the future for something else, this article should be deleted as opposed to draftified, as there already exists an article for this subject in draftspace. (Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 06:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not only was she known for her catchphrase, but she also received over a million followers on TikTok insanely quickly. Especially with her capitalizing on the meme. As the other "Keep" votes noted, she is like Bhad Bhabie in which she became known for her catchphrase.  Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 14:08, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Follower counts aren't relevant in notability discussions, and Bhad Babie's bio article is primarily about her musical career. Maybe we can revisit this discussion if Welch becomes a successful musician or something. But it seems like Hawk Tuah's time in the media spotlight has already come to an end (at least for now, who knows if she'll be relevant again in the future). That the deletion discussion lasted longer than her fifteen minutes of fame should give us some pause. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 18:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Not true. A quick Google search will review she is still being covered, with multiple articles per day. RTredwell (talk) 16:47, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * But which outlets are still pumping out multiple articles about her per day? The Daily Mail? TMZ? It's been roughly a week since any reliable outlet mentioned her, and even then, there's only been a handful published in the last two weeks. Her day in the sun is over. That doesn't mean she'll never be article-worthy, but she certainly isn't yet. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 17:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * For WP:TOOSOON, some articles about disasters or events that are recent I haven't seen a notice about this.
 * For WP:SINGLEEVENT, (this may not count) articles about the Super Bowl, the event only happens on those days pacifically. And the players involved in the football game may not return to the Super Bowl.
 * Turning it into a draft probably would be a good idea if the article doesn't apply to the rules. Tonkarooson (discuss). 22:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete. Periodically, an article like this comes along that illustrates the absurdity of the WP "notability via sources" idea, by which I mean the idea that the existence of sources is a sufficient condition for an article. The growing corpus of non-encylcopedic content across WP should convince all of us that sources are instead a necessary (but not sufficient) condition and that editors' jobs require added judgements of things like accomplishment to assess the encyclopedic value of the articles that should appear here. (Otherwise, going forward, we should just let AI slurp-in all sources and auto-create articles.) I think it should be clear that there's no encyclopedic content here and, that at a minimum, we would look to WP:ONEEVENT for a softer delete that would not rule-out recreation if this person actually makes notable contributions in the future, as opposed to being forgotten about, once the novelty of her comment runs its course. 128.252.210.3 (talk) 18:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * We're evaluating this particular deletion against WP:GNG, not your desire to have an editorial bar for "accomplishment". Jpatokal (talk) 03:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * What is considered a notable contribution?  Would you classify a music group that had a 1 hit wonder and never heard from again as notable?  The very definition of notable is "worthy of attention or notice; remarkable."  She definitely qualifies for that, she got her attention, and obviously she is still getting it, by using her new found fame.  Just like others, being famous for being famous is sadly notable in these times.   Pirhounix (talk) 10:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.