Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most-liked YouTube comments


 * 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. ✗ plicit  00:49, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

List of most-liked YouTube comments

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not meet WP:LISTN. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him 19:04, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him 19:04, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him 19:04, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete All of the sources appear to be OR. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:14, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Not discussed by independent sources at all, barring a single Daily Dot article on the top comment. Yee no   (talk) 🍁 20:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Does appear to be original research, and wasn't able to find good sources/support for it. -- Tautomers (T C) 00:27, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 03:40, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't finish that much of the page, and i'm really bad when it comes to sourcing stuff. Can you please help me find some? Pwnda (talk) 04:47, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Obviously original research. Ajf773 (talk) 09:17, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * What is???? The likes of the comments are all accurate, i dont get it?? Like the proof is directly from YouTube itself Pwnda (talk) 11:11, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Pwnda please see WP:Original research. Wikipedia requires reputable, reliable sources that differ from the subject of the article in question. Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him 17:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , to expand on what EpicPupper said, there are two issues that have been raised here. The first one is that our guideline for which lists can be included on Wikipedia says that the subject of the list needs to have been discussed as a group in reliable sources. So, for instance, we can have a list article on the tallest buildings in the world, because there have been lots of news articles ranking the tallest buildings or discussing them all together. None of us have been able to find articles like that listing out the most-liked YouTube comments, and until something like that is published, our notability guidelines say this topic doesn't warrant a page. The second, related issue is that, without such news articles, it's possible to source the YouTube comments themselves individually, but not to source the fact that a given comment is the 2nd/3rd/etc. most-liked. To do so just based on your own research, rather than taking data someone else has compiled, is considered synthesis, a disallowed type of original research.
 * If you can find articles from reputable news outlets ranking the most-liked YouTube comments, or if such articles are published in the future, it will be possible to keep the list, but otherwise there unfortunately isn't a place for it on Wikipedia, and I'd suggest publishing it somewhere else on the internet. Still, thanks for your work on the list—I know it's not fun to have a page you've worked hard on put up for deletion, and I hope it doesn't discourage you from continuing to contribute elsewhere. The List of most-liked YouTube videos page gets thousands of views per day and needs some updating and some additional citations, so that might be one related page to improve if you're interested. Cheers, &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 20:03, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks Sdkb. Adding on to what Sdkb said, Pwnda, if you want to work on the list on an alternative outlet, I've archived it. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him 21:49, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Pwnda (talk) 08:07, 2 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per above. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 10:01, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Definitely an WP:OR. ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 15:00, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. If anything is non-notable cruft, this is. J I P  &#124; Talk 13:16, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOR.  Wario-Man  talk 03:00, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research and non-notable. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:39, 5 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:OR. NavjotSR (talk) 07:30, 6 July 2021 (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.