Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How's the leader formed


 * 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. The SandDoctor Talk 20:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

How's the leader formed

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unremarkable Chinese "meme", fails WP:V because the title is not used in any source and WP:NOT since it reads like a dictionary definition. No evidence of notability, half of the sources in the article are dead links. The editor  whose username is Z0 17:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:03, 7 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete The article is about a trivial, fringe, non-notable subject. It does not merit an entry even in its own-language Wikipedia. -The Gnome (talk) 18:43, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete User:It's gonna be awesome has created a large number of POVy articles about unremarkable people or memes which have been deleted or currently nominated for deletion. -Zanhe (talk) 22:31, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep It is being translated from Chinese Wikipedia. -- It's gonna be awesome! ✎ Talk♬ 02:55, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: not even a suggestion of notability. I strongly suggest the creator write these things up better, in better English, with better sources, if they want these articles to stand a chance. Drmies (talk) 02:57, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Does Wikipedia asks contributors to be able to write in perfect English before they can make any contribution? Appears no. If it's not written with proper grammar, people can help improve it. And the initial contributors would greatly appreciate their helping hands.-- It's gonna be awesome! ✎ Talk♬ 03:11, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No Wikipedia does not require that--but if you write it better with better sources there might not be so many editors who find your contributions problematic. BTW I wasn't (just) talking about grammar. In this case, the very title is in improper English (you should check that yourself), and what this supposed animation is, and how and why it was produced, is unclear. That's not a matter of (just) grammar. Drmies (talk) 03:16, 8 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Who said anything about "perfect English", It's gonna be awesome? Wikipedia does not demand diplomas in the English language by its contributors. But, at the same time, Wikipedia is foundationally an encylopaedia, before and above all else. And encyclopaedias contain text written in a manner that is simple, informative, paedagogic, explanatory, inspiring, and so on. To write text that meets such requirements, one needs to speak and write in the specific language on a level that is way above elementary. Contributors must be quite proficient in their understanding and use of English; I'd imagine somewhere at or above ILR Level 3. I'm able to converse in the language of Freedonia but this does not make me a competent contributor to the Freedonian Wikipedia. -The Gnome (talk) 05:42, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes. One should write the kind of English that makes it look like an article is on a notable subject. If the actual subject is hard to understand, and the claim to importance incomprehensible or unclear, then one should improve one's English. Drmies (talk) 21:25, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:31, 10 July 2018 (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.