Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herman Cain Award


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. 28bytes (talk) 19:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Herman Cain Award

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

Not an actual award, in the same way that Bad Sex in Fiction Award is, but a community on Reddit. If the article is to be kept, it should be about the subreddit. As for the news coverage, I don't see how it passes WP:SUSTAINED, as it's all within a month of each other, this is in contrast to for instance r/The_Donald, which had coverage spanning multiple years. The article should be redirected to Controversial_Reddit_communities, which is the appropriate place to cover it. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Withdraw as this is clearly going nowhere fast. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep due to its coverage by multiple mainstream RS. I'm torn on how to frame it though (subreddit or meme).  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 16:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep While the sources cited in the article are all from Sept-Oct 2021, it's not hard to find more recent coverage with a simple Google News search. I agree that the prose, categories, and possibly the title should be tweaked to make the subreddit the central topic rather than the "award". Colin M (talk) 17:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per EvergreenFir. Normally content that derives from an unreliable source like Reddit is treated as from an unreliable source (IOW we don't create an article), but the fact that multiple RS have covered it, and that it therefore passes GNG, means we keep this. In fact, our "purpose" here requires it be done. Wikipedia's "purpose" is to document the "sum total of human knowledge", as long as it is mentioned in RS. Any problems with the article should be fixed and are no excuse for deletion. -- Valjean (talk) 17:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I set up this article and posted reasons for doing so at Talk:Herman_Cain_Award. The strongest reason for keeping is that this article meets WP:GNG.  Bluerasberry   (talk)  13:35, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Bingo! That is the ONLY reason necessary for not supporting an AfD. When approaching an AfD, editors should ask themselves ONE question: Does this pass GNG? If so, !vote Keep. All other concerns about an article are covered by WP:PRESERVE. Fixing and improving, not deleting, is how we roll here, and bogus AfDs violate our purpose here, which is to document "the sum total of human knowledge." Editors who create AfDs for articles that pass GNG should be trouted for undermining the very reason Wikipedia was created. If they do it repeatedly, they need a topic ban against creating AfDs. Bluerasberry should be commended for creating this article. -- Valjean (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per reasons mentioned in the article talk page. MT TrainTalk 18:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I take the WP:SUSTAINED concern to heart, but I tend to think that an Internet thing that's covered for more than a month and keeps getting mentioned probably clears that bar. We're not talking about a three-day sensation. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 22:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per all the reasons listed above. MaghrebiFalafel (talk) 15:32, 21 January 2022 (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.