Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hatten är din (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus. Two relists didn't bring much more in the way of comments, there isn't really consensus to do anything here so we default to keep. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:10, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Hatten är din
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Despite being saved during its first AfD, the article is not up to scratch. There are tags from 5 years ago which have clearly been ignored. It is not a known, notable, or (in)famous meme. There are citation concerns which I doubt will ever be resolved. I conclude that the article was barely notable before and should be considered for deletion now. doktorb wordsdeeds 14:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hatten är din is indeed a known meme from its time; it is described on the website Know Your Meme and was the subject of reporting in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet; I have added that reference to the article.   It was also treated as well-known at a 2002 conference on internet memes. --Chonak (talk) 19:43, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note that Know Your Meme features user-generated content and is thus not a reliable source. Qrsdogg (talk) 16:41, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the point. There is also site-generated content on KYM, namely the Know Your Meme video episodes. Could they count as a source?  They do purport to be researched, and the episode on Phonetic Transcriptions cites Hatten är din as an example of soramimi and animutation (about 1:30-1:45 of the video). --Chonak (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Whether the videos that the staff produces are reliable or not is a bit of a grey area, I've heard editors opine in different directions on that. Use your best judgment, I guess. Qrsdogg (talk) 01:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak delete - I guess the basic question is if a Swedish internet meme can be notable. I would say "only with good referencing", and neither the English or the Swedish version of the article has this type of referencing. (The closest it comes is a mention in a list of "49 sites to laugh at" in the tabloid Aftonbladet in 2001. Not everything considered a joke by a tabloid is of sufficient notability for its own article.) By the way, the English version of sv:Ansiktsburk, a similar form of "Turkhit", was deleted in 2009. Tomas e (talk) 18:32, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   05:23, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - This was one of the early Internet memes, widely known in Scandinavia and featured in contemporary media both on and off the net, including TV. Most people I know in Denmark still remember it to this day. So yes it is notable and deleting it would be detrimental to the value of Wikipedia. 62.200.22.2 (talk) 15:51, 8 August 2011 (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.