Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KickBoxer Snaps Leg


 * 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 of the debate was Delete - CrazyRussian talk/email 08:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

KickBoxer Snaps Leg
Non notable, not encyclopedic: Only Google hit is a redirect from another Wikipedia article (Vicious Leg Break Fram 09:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete already tried to prod this stub. There isn't even any information on the fight this occured in! ˉˉanetode╞┬╡ 10:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, link goes to straight to a video-sales site so it looks like this is an advertisement as well. Tychocat 10:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, advertisement. --Coredesat 13:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, primarily because your logic is flawed: I added the link to the "advertising site" in an attempt to identify the fight. It obviously happened.  The question, I would think, would be more about "importance".  Please, let us elevate the conversation.  You guys frequently put the contributor in the vise between having strictly non-commerical links and documenting assertions.  I guess the more fundamental question is: does this article assert any important facts? You could argue that the only assertion is: "You can break your leg really bad if you kickbox and the other guy blocks with his knee". Oh, and the viral video thing. Compared to most articles about music songs and tracks, at least such a fact might possibly be of some use to the child in Africa that Jimbo keeps saying that the encyclopedia is for. -- 64.175.42.87 17:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonnotable and probably nonencyclopedic. If, at some point, there's a List of Popular Viral Videos that doesn't get AfD'ed itself, this can be added there. -- Docether 19:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Docether. --DaveG12345 00:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Vicious Leg Break, mentioned by the nom, looks the same kind of inconsequential article, which could just as easily have remained where it was, as a link to the external site from within the Sid Eudy main article describing the incident. --DaveG12345 00:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This is the same category as Icy Hot Stuntaz or the Star Wars kid and could have as much context as the former if its left up and someone who knows the story tells it.  As for the name there are many versions out there of the same clip, all with different name.   Looking at youtube with the words kickboxer breaks you get at least 20 different videoes and searching google with kickboxing leg break gets thousands of hits.   If anything it should be moved to a name that gets the most google hits ... if that's a naming convention.--Abaddon 10:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * "Kickboxing Leg Break" gives 1,190 Google hits, but only 74 distinct ones. Still not a lot, and not enough to warrant inclusion. "Kickboxer Leg Break" gives 176 hits and 38 distinct ones. When checking the number of hits for a phrase (or any fixed combination of words), be certain to put " " around them. This will always heavily reduce the number of hits. Secondly, try to find if you have actually a large number of distinct Google hits. Often, Google will have many pages from the same source (like a forum or whatever), that will count a many hist but are in fact only one website. Thus, Kickboxing Leg Break gives 152,000 hits, "Kickboxing Leg Break" gives 1270 (this time, the number varies with every serach), and going to page 10 of the results gives me that there are only 74 distinct results. Anyway, enough Google lessons, the result is that it is not notable anyway you name it. Fram 11:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yet other internet memes like:
 * "SNL Digital Shorts" get 500 google hits
 * "Anabukinchan" get 800 google hits
 * "Gert Jonnys" get 800 google hits
 * Although its not on Wikipedia look at the video clip of that guy who's head goes up an elephant's ass. Everyone has seen it but it only gets 400 hits on google   Your google hit number theory is flawed, some video clips are so and popular that, like a virus, they change their name and are hard to track down.  Google results shouldn't be the be all and end all of whether or not an article stays.--Abaddon 12:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * First of all, I think that some of them (like Anabukinchan) are different, because they have a background (verifiable), a story beyond "it's funny". Secondly, many memes are discussed for deletion, and some are kept while others (most) are deleted. And if they always change their name and are hard to track down, how will you encyclopedize them? Give them a random name? Create fifty slightly different names and make them all redirects? And then, when people who come looking for it (and thus probably have seen the movie) find it here, all they read is what they knew all along, as their is nothing encyclopedic that can be said (or has been said at least) about this videoclip. Finally, another Google lesson: don't write elephant's-ass and then come here to show that it has only 400 hits. Written in your traditional way, it has 4,260,000 hits, and written in the strict way, it has no hits (none at all). I have no idea under what name that video is known (I don't know it and don't care for it), but obviously not that one. Fram 13:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This meme has no content ... YET. If it's left on here someone will come on who knows the story and fill in the background.  That's the point of a stub is it not?   Someone will come on wikipedia looking for info on the kickboxing clip and find it either by searching or in the list of Internet memes.  Already people have added clues and content i.e. the link in the ring what kind of leg break it was, etc.   As for the elephants head I was just following YOUR google search requirements.  If I follow your NEW way of searching google then kick boxer breaks leg gets hundreds of thousands of google hits again.   While like you said "head into elephant's ass" gets 0 hits.   Just becauce YOU don't know about something and don't care for its subject matter isn't grounds for deletion. --Abaddon 22:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * And just because something is indexed by Google doesn't mean that it is in any way important or deserving of an article. Try to think of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia rather than YouTube. ˉˉanetode╞┬╡ 23:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Look again, you weren't following my Google search requitements at all, you didn't put "'s around the search term. As for the rest, we'll let the community decide if it is worthy of inclusion or not... Fram 05:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I totally agree that we shouldn't use some flawed Google index number that someone thought up off the top of their head.  While Wikipedia isn't Youtube it is an encyclopedia.  Not an encyclopedia of just stodgy scientific data but also an encyclopedia of Popular culture too.   This is were this Internet Meme fits in.   It may not appeal to everyone but it's still Wikipedia worthy.
 * If your jab at the Google index is intended at me, could you then please just explain how it is flawed? Fram 10:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * For reasons you've already pointed out.  This clip gets more hits than other Wikipedia internet memes like:
 * "SNL Digital Shorts" get 500 google hits
 * "Anabukinchan" get 800 google hits
 * "Gert Jonnys" get 800 google hits
 * Famous "head into elephant's ass" clip gets 0 hits


 * While Wikipedia isn't Youtube it is an encyclopedia. Not an encyclopedia of just stodgy scientific data but also an encyclopedia of Popular culture too.  This is were this Internet Meme fits in.   An article shouldn't be deleted just because someone doesn't care for it.--Abaddon 21:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've seen the clip before, Wikipedia should include Popular Culture references like this, let it be--Esemono 06:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: User:Esemono is User:8888888888 (aka Abaddon) ˉˉanetode╞┬╡ 08:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * And I'm saying again, Wikipedia should include Popular Culture references like this, let it be--Esemono 09:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Non-encyclopedic, Wikipedia does not need to have an article for every video clip on the Internet. Delete. Also see: afd for Vicious Leg Break. -- The Anome 14:26, 1 July 2006 (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.