Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Internet phenomena in Pakistan


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Owen&times; &#9742;  23:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

List of Internet phenomena in Pakistan

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

WP:SYNTH - Fails GNG. Those suggesting to keep this article must substantiate with evidence from RS that these listed "phenomena" are indeed are "Internet phenomena in Pakistan." Also delete per @Arms & Hearts, who stated here given the existence of List of Internet phenomena and the fact that the internet, by its very nature, isn't affected by national boundaries, this seems unnecessary. Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 19:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:48, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 19:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:NLIST. Direct and in-depth coverage in Dawn, Hindustan Times , Times of India , NPR , Proft by Pakistan Today , Youlin . Additional coverage in academic journals . Saqib, we're here to WP:BUILDWP, not to destroy. AFDs with lacking proper WP:BEFORE are becoming common in your case. Combined with the fact that you rarely vote to keep , it shows how ardent a deletionist you are and how much damage is being done with these bad nominations. I have question: how many times you have rescued a topic that was up for deletion but was kept due to your proper BEFORE. I don't think there are many you can show us. Please stop nominating these borderline notable topics or someone has to ask admins to stop this. 2A04:4A43:8F7F:FCB8:465:8EEC:4116:BE64 (talk) 12:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello IP - the article is titled Internet phenomena in Pakistan but the coverage you provided are primarily focus on some memes and the provided coverage doesn't even mention Internet phenomena in Pakistan so please just avoid WP:FAKE, as well WP:SYNTH, like i said before. Additionally, I can understand your frustration with my AFDs, so if you believe a t/ban is warranted, I encourage you to raise it at the appropriate forum, not in AFDs. —  Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 13:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete or draftify IP points out several nice sources above, but none of them are used in this article. It could be reasonable to write about Pakistan's internet culture and use of memes (if if's even distinct from anywhere else), but that is not this article. Here is just five specific incidents. Just because something was briefly trending on Twitter does not make it a "phenomenon" or notable. Surely there are many thousands of videos that have gone viral or resulted in a hashtag, but this not the place to compile anything that "generated trolling on social media" or resulted in people making memes. The global internet culture has changed so that many topics see brief fame, but Wikipedia is not the place to synthesize them like this. Reywas92Talk 01:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: 2A04:4A43:8F7F:FCB8:465:8EEC:4116:BE64 presented sources that deal with the topic as a set, so that the list meets the requirement for notability. If the sources, that can be added at any time, are judged to focus only on (a list of) memes and/or the name of the page is considered inaccurate, then rename List of Internet memes in Pakistan. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  15:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I like to repeat that the article is titled Internet phenomena in Pakistan but the sources IP provided above primarily focus on some memes without mentioning the subject of the article which is Internet phenomena in Pakistan. So how can it be claimed that the list meets the requirement for notability when the coverage does not even discuss the subject? And suggesting it to rename to List of Internet memes in Pakistan raises the question of whether such lists are generally permissible? Typically, WP does not host such lists, although every country may have its own memes. This would be like having List of Internet memes in the United States or List of Internet memes in India. Pointless. Right?  And sure If we were to pursue this, the list must meet WP:NLIST / WP:STANDALONE, which requires  coverage directly about the list itself, not merely individual memes. This topic clearly fails WP:LISTCRITERIA so let's please avoid WP:SYNTH, WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:INDISCRIMINATE etc. —  Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 16:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll repeat myself too, then. I explained why I think this list does meet WP:NLIST: there are reliable sources discussing the subject as a set. Renaming it is just an adjustment restricting the scope (memes being Internet phenomena). Permissible, yes, very much so, for the reason that it meets the guideline about lists. Feel free to create lists of Internet memes in other countries if you have the time and interest and you can find sources. It is certainly not pointless, no, since you're asking me. The rest of the guidelines you mention etc. is not exactly necessary if you read my !vote with attention but thank you for your time and effort. Should you consider replying until I agree with your view or for other reasons, I apologise in advance for not making any further comments. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  17:25, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Mushy Yank, No, I don't expect you to agree with me. You've your opinion and I've mine, but I reserve the right to counter your arguments, if I see them not aligning with policy. — Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 14:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails WP: INDISCRIMINATE. It's not reasonable to compile an endless list of non notable memes. Codenamewolf (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep and rename to List of Internet memes in Pakistan per Mushy Yank. Meets WP:NLIST which says ... a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. and WP:NEXIST says Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article These memes are discussed as a set in Urdu references as well such as, , , in reputed publication like BBC Urdu. 91.74.118.185 (talk) 23:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * To establish WP:N based on GNG, you've provided total 04 sources but all from the same publication, BBC Urdu and per GNG Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability. However, that's not my primary concern. What I'm worried about is whether we truly need a List of Internet memes in Pakistan as I don't believe it still passes the WP:N test. Generally, we don't create stand-alone lists like "List of X" unless X itself is a well-established encyclopedic topic with its own standalone articles. In this case, none of the memes or phenomena have their own standalone articles, which raises concerns about potentially violating WP:INDISCRIMINATE - a policy on avoiding indiscriminate collections of information. — Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 06:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete The issue with WP:SYNTH is concerning. Lorstaking (talk) 07:52, 12 July 2024 (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.