Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hate Hurts You (public service announcement)


 * 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. czar 16:56, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Hate Hurts You (public service announcement)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable PSA red dogsix (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I... umm... delete? Timothy Joseph Wood  21:01, 29 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Clearly this public service announcement existed, but no sources have been provided to prove its notability beyond a brief mention on the pop culture website RetroJunk.com. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:08, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't care! I think it should be on Wikipedia. I have NO IDEA why you'd want to delete the-- OHHHHH I see. But could you at least not delete the page? It's just that I don't really know how to be a Wikipedia user.

1. It's on TV Tropes. That's how i found it.

2. A man named Radio Landscape made a remix. That's how popular it is...?

I really don't know what to say. Somebody help me!

[] --Kaettekita T. Lavhey (talk) 21:20, 30 August 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: PSA: We need more opinions here.
 * I'm not saying this PSA is a bad topic to have a Wikipedia article about, but on the other hand it hasn't been established as being a good topic to have an article about, either. The main issue we are dealing with is notability. As expressed in the general notability guideline, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." The Retrojunk page cited in the article is not from a particularly reliable source, as Retrojunk seems to accept articles from anybody, nor is it significant coverage since Retrojunk's item is only three sentences long. I found various references to this PSA on message boards and the like (see and, for example), but those aren't reliable sources either. I enjoy reading TV Tropes, but as user-generated content, it's not considered a reliable source. Radio Landscape does not seem to be a famous remixer, or at least he doesn't have an article on Wikipedia yet, so he doesn't contribute much to notability. I actually did find a reliable source (the Chicago Tribune) that mentioned the PSA , but the Tribune article has less than one sentence about the PSA, so that's not significant coverage. So I think that if this PSA is to have a Wikipedia article, it will be necessary for someone to delve into whatever offline sources might exist and find much better sourcing in terms of significant coverage from reliable sources. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete this article. There is not enough information from reliable sources to write an encyclopedic article on the subject, and I don't see it being a reasonable search term given the disambiguator (although I could be convinced otherwise on that part). That being said, I think it is reasonable to mention the PSA on the Jewish Chautauqua Society article, given the Chicago Times article (which is a great find!) menaechmi  (talk) 15:29, 13 September 2017 (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.