Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most-viewed YouTube videos


 * 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 WP:SNOW keep. -- Flooded w/ them 100s  20:03, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

List of most-viewed YouTube videos

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

List is not encyclopedic content and we are not the Hot 100. Looks like listcruft and WP:NOTSTATS. List is nothing more than poll/popularity data that is subject to rapid changes and maintaining these lists is not what Wikipedia is about. These lists are magnets for UPE/COI promotional editors. See also Articles for deletion/List of most-followed Instagram Business accounts. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:41, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  ~Ruyaba~   {talk}  16:00, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  ~Ruyaba~   {talk}  16:00, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge parts of this list with YouTube. A smaller part of this list, preferably a “Top 10”, is useful since it reflects trends on the site (supported by secondary sources). I vote for merge over “Keep” because most of the information is original research and original statistics that are meaningless to most readers. For example, who actually cares about the Top 10 videos of 2005? Most of the videos are music videos that never became the most viewed video at any time on the site.  Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 16:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I changed my vote to Keep. I listed my opinion on the matter in the comment below.  Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 19:16, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep but trim. This used to only cover the top 30 videos, which reflected how mainstream sources covered that. YouTube video counts are still significantly covered in the news, so a short list of the top videos make sense. But unfortunately, editors want to take this out to huge numbers which is just beyond what we should be doing. --M asem (t) 16:13, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep but reducing the list from 100 to 50 videos and delete the list "by year of release"--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 16:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as it is. I would not reduce the number of videos—please not! and I would keep the "By year of release"—the most interesting part of the article in my view! Eventually, I would transform it in "List of most-viewed YouTube music videos". --Checco (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - I would need to see more arguments against notability in order to support this AfD. I think the subject does pass notability standards. Skirts89 (talk) 21:14, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - In theory the article could be merged, but then again, the main article has a lot of info already, if the article is to be merged considering the other AFD (list of subscribers) this could add too much information to the main article, and considering that this information is notable by itself, I am against the deletion. Garlicolive (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep but upgrading the list from 100 to 200 videos. Dieter Mueller (talk) 00:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep The article subject has recieved substantial media coverage, and meets WP:LISTN. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:35, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:LISTN. It has plenty of secondary source coverage. Wikiman5676 (talk) 05:46, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * KEEP as is. Meets WP:LISTN. Has plenty of secondary source coverage. Don't reduce. Paintspot Infez (talk) 18:38, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - I have changed by vote to Keep. Gathering from previous comments, I agree that parts of the list, especially the top couple of videos, certinately meets WP:LISTN; especially through the quote "The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability". However, I would argue on either condensing the list or simply not expanding it, as adding more to the list would be incredibly overwhelming to certain readers. In addition, I still hold on to my previous argument to remove the "Top 10 videos" per year section, though. BUT, I like the Historical most-viewed videos since it is well sourced and graphed.  Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 19:16, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with you to reduce the list--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 11:20, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - As someone who analyzes YouTube statistics, the article has been a useful tool that contains important information which I have found difficulty looking for on other websites. I see no problem with a top 100. The top 5 most-viewed videos by year table is useful because earlier years do not have any videos on the top 100, so it is informative to see what videos are being watched throughout all of YouTube's history. The historical most-viewed videos table is important to include because of what a tremendous accomplishment possessing the most-viewed YouTube video has become. 0737290632t2x273n (talk) 14:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with keeping the historical most viewed videos, but disagree with keeping the “Top 5 most-viewed videos by year.” One has historically significant videos, but the other (for the most part) doesn’t.  Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 20:32, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with "keep". I suggest adding "Top 5 most-viewed videos by upload year". That would provide insight on content creation more than content consumption. The current "Top 5 most-viewed videos by year" is historically important insight on content consumption instead of content creation. This way we could have both aspects. As mentioned in earlier discussion, these statistics are time-consuming to gather, but all verifiable, so any misconduct is addressable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.195.59 (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2019 (UTC)  — 212.149.195.59 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep The subject meets WP:LISTN and has a large number of trusted second sources. 89ezagonoszkommunistanacionalista64 (talk) 16:14, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep but per some of the comments above, trim the list. I suggest the removal of all videos with fewer than 2 billion views, with perhaps an exception for non-music videos. For videos with fewer than 2 billion views, but a minimum of 1 billion views, prose and/or a category page can be used for summary. --LABcrabs (talk) 04:51, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as is. These videos are at the forefront of one of the most visited websites in the world. It allows people to see the most popular online content over time and some of the most popular videos on the internet ever. Keep the top 100 as it is and keep this as its own page. The page has very useful information. Don't trim it back to 30. Why delete useful information from Wikipedia? 15:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.52.203.131 (talk)  — 104.52.203.131 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * 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.