Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate's Birthday Party


 * 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 Snow Delete. Glass  Cobra  16:45, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Kate's Birthday Party
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Attempt by a crowd of enthusiasts, mostly single-purpose accounts, to promote an online event. No evidence of notability. Fails WP:RS, WP:EVENT and WP:N andy (talk) 15:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Notability: http://www.dagbladet.no/2010/04/25/kjendis/bursdag/facebook/nettsamfunn/sosiale_medier/11436319/

Count with more articles just like that one turning up quite soon.


 * Delete Agree with nominator. Non-notable event, no sources other than Facebook, image is probably a copyvio - it really does just look like a crowd of SPAs embarked on an Internet stunt. -- Boing!   said Zebedee  15:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * comment This does seem to be an RS establishing some kind of notability, but it needs more then one source. But I think that not news may come into effect here as well.Slatersteven (talk) 15:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as drivel. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  directorate  ─╢ 15:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Clearly a non-notable event and could easily be speedied-- JForget 15:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, but not speedy. The growth of this, and the fact it is making mainstream media, means that this AFD should run. Esteffect (talk) 15:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As an example, it is already in the Norwegian news media at Dagbladet. Esteffect (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Page has been semi-protected due to removal of AFD template, and the possible security risk (individual's address has been posted). Esteffect (talk) 15:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * comment A lot of one use IP's voting here.Slatersteven (talk) 15:56, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I can understand why this page is up for deletion, but due to the exponential growth of attendees in this in the last 24 hours, I think we should delay deleting this page for a while until/unless it becomes clear that this is not going to become a serious meme. If the growth of attendees continues at the same pace this event will become very notable within that time frame, so we don't have to wait long. If the growth rate of attendees begins to slow down and if in 24 hours this has not gained some kind of media attention then I have no problem with deleting this page. I think we should just wait a bit and let this develop first. Ben1220 (talk) 14:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Moved by myself from talk page. Esteffect (talk) 15:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:NOTCRYSTAL. It haqs to be notable now, not in two daysSlatersteven (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete or if it gets more coverage merge to Facebook. Note that the real party didn't happen so the title should be more like "Facebook invitation to Kate's party." Anyway not something of lasting importance. Kitfoxxe (talk) 16:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Commentits not May 1st yet, though I notice that the articel says the party has been canceld. As such I see no real notability as an event (if it does not happen). I am also beging to suspect that this page is promotional in nature.Slatersteven (talk) 16:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Despite an ever growing body of evidence to the contrary, Wikipedia's not a directory of every unfunny flash-in-the-pan internet meme that ever happened. Encyclopaedia Dramatica is that way. – iride  scent  16:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Seriously? And the copyrighted image can go too.  Aiken   &#9835;   16:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The event has now been taken down. Let's just delete this and forget it ever happened.  Aiken   &#9835;   16:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is not notable per guidelines. Jasonid (talk) 16:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * How about Keep, but if a person is found to have invited him or herself to the party and edited the WP article he or she should be banned from WP for ever for WP:COI? (Just kidding. :-) )Kitfoxxe (talk) 16:39, 25 April 2010 (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.