Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fastest YouTube videos to reach 100 million views


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 00:21, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

List of fastest YouTube videos to reach 100 million views

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another YouTube article that does not follow WP:N guidelines. The only sources are either this playlist or direct links to YouTube videos. Even if some sources commentate on "the fastest YouTube videos to reach 100 million views", users could potentially abuse the system and end up creating multiple, pointless articles such as "Fastest YouTube videos to reach 250 million", "Fastest YouTube videos to reach one billion", and so forth. In simple terms, isn't a wikipedia page called "Fastest-grossing films to $1 billion" or "Fastest-grossing films to gross to $2 billion", instead that information is included in the List of fastest-grossing films article, complete with many reliable secondary sources. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:58, 7 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete poorly sourced list that is likely unverifiable. The source is a user created list on Youtube, not even Youtube itself. Fails relevant notability guidelines. Probably should be a discussion for List of most subscribed users on YouTube and List of most liked YouTube videos, which have identical issues. FuriouslySerene (talk) 01:18, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is built using third-party sources that are independent of the subject. This entire list is sourced directly to YouTube, which is not a valid source for an article about YouTube. This is a classic example of original research. Brad  v  03:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete for the above reasons. Unverifiable claims who only use Youtube videos and playlists as sources.  64.183.45.226 (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2017 (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.