Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most disliked 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 keep. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America1000 00:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

List of most disliked YouTube videos

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an arbitrary list of videos that offers nothing encyclopedic. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 21:53, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Beautifully written and meticulously sourced, this article represents the pinnacle of Wikipedia content and is the culmination of centuries of human progress. Denarivs (talk) 02:18, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The nominator is basically accusing the article of being an indiscriminate collection of information. However, I do not think that this is the case; the list is limited to precisely 40 entries that are determined by an objective standard (specifically the number of dislikes received). Now per the indiscriminate policy, any list of data “should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources”. This article does in fact cite a number of reliable sources independent of YouTube (including the BBC, Time Magazine and the Guinness Book of World Records) describing the progression of the most disliked YouTube videos. Furthermore, the article also includes a number of sources supporting the claim that the most disliked YouTube videos are of legitimate cultural and (to a lesser extent) political interest. While at first glance this article doesn’t exactly scream “encyclopedic”, I think it’s narrow enough and has gotten enough coverage by reliable sources to justify inclusion. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well sourced, not arbitrary. Also per what Spirit of Eagle has said.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   04:48, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. I don't disagree that there are a handful of secondary sources to support some of the videos are in fact notable for their amount of dislikes. What I do disagree with is significant coverage to support a list of these items. This content belongs in other places. If Rebecca Black's "Friday" was the most disliked YouTube video, it belongs on that song's article (which it currently does). I do agree with Spirit of Eagle that there is cultural significance for the amount of dislikes a video receives, I simply don't see any coverage of a "Top 40 most disliked videos on YouTube" to support this list. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  08:30, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * People have written articles about the most disliked YouTube videos. 1, 2, and a blacklisted link page, and that's from the first page of google. The reliability of these pages is debatable, though.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   10:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Although, as I mentioned, I agree there's decently sourced information regarding the cultural significance of heavily disliked YouTube videos, I still don't see, including your links, much support for an ongoing ranking. To use Rebecca Black's song again (my apologies), you certainly can find enough RS to say what the song is about, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to say it justifies a "List of songs referencing buses" along with "The wheels on the bus", because although there's significant coverage about them individually, there's not enough to support them as a group. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  10:57, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Several of the sources linked to from this article discuss the “competition” for the most disliked video, and the ranking of some of the most disliked videos at a given time. Additionally, the BBC and Times article make specific reference to the top 10 and top 18 (respectively) most disliked videos. Now it’s true that specific attention has only been paid to the top videos on the list, and that the bottom of the list has been largely ignored. However, WP:LISTN states that all of a list’s entries do not need to be covered by the sources so long as the general grouping has gotten coverage. (Also, I found a book that included a chapter entitled “Listener-Senders, Musical Irony, and the Most “Disliked” YouTube Videos”. Most of the chapter is unfortunately cut off, but the title indicates that it does in fact discuss the most disliked YouTube videos). Spirit of Eagle (talk) 22:04, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Honestly I was not expecting a push back... We cannot write random "lists of" article based on every statistical anomaly. The deviation itself needs to have credible reliable sources so the question in mind is "Why should we consider the most disliked aspect of these videos notable". The individual videos are notable, but not the fact that they are most disliked independently as the most disliked is an arbitrary feature. Otherwise we would have strange articles such as most disliked videos on YouTube by demographics, nationality and whatever other statistics available on YouTube for the very same videos. That is probably why List of most liked YouTube videos, List of most viewed YouTube videos and List of most disliked YouTube videos have so much overlap. It is pretty much the same list with different ranking. Just sort the videos by name to see what I mean. This should not be very surprising since all we are covering in these articles is the number of clicks on buttons (most liked/disliked) and number of views. So, what about it? The like button has been pressed 5.3 million times (rank 14) for "All About That Bass" and the dislike button was pressed 0.61 million times (rank 32) for that same video which was viewed a total of 1.735 billion times (rank 14). What does this statistical information offer us? What about "Gangnam Style" which was liked 11.91 million times (rank 2), disliked 1.694 million times (rank 6) and viewed 2.759 billion (rank 1)? I just pulled two random examples from these three lists. The more popular a video is the more like/dislike clicks it will receive. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 13:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that we should only create statistical list articles when there are reliable sources independent of the subject talking about the list subject. However, my basic argument for keeping this specific statistical listing is that there are in fact reliable sources independent of YouTube that provide coverage to the article’s topic. If someone were to create a list such as “Most Liked YouTube Videos by Canadians”, then I would vote to delete it since there are no reliable sources discussing the list topic (nor does YouTube track most viewed videos by demographic group for that matter). Spirit of Eagle (talk) 22:39, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Each video has such statistics for demographics. I remember them being publicly available but that seemingly has changed at some point. My point is number of likes/dislikes are just as arbitrary as any other information. On the other hand, a liked percentage column in the main List of most viewed YouTube videos would fulfill the role of the two lists (liked/disliked) in one go. Do you see what I mean with this? These pages have very little purpose aside from inadequately mirroring List of most viewed YouTube videos. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 11:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I went through and counted the appearances of the videos listed in this article in the List of most viewed YouTube videos. For the count, any video that appeared anywhere in any of the lists in the most viewed article was counted. In my overall count, 17 videos appeared in both articles, while 23 videos appeared solely in this article. In other words, an outright majority of videos in this article make no appearance in the most viewed article. Additionally, amongst the top 10 most disliked videos, only 3 (Baby, Gagnam Style and Wrecking Ball) appeared in the most viewed article. Of the top 20 most disliked articles, only 6 appeared in the most viewed article (Sorry, Wheels on the Bus, and Маша плюс каша in addition to the three listed previously). My point is that while there is some overlap, the majority of listings, particularly in the top half, do not appear in the most viewed article. Simply adding a "percent liked" column to the most viewed article would eliminate the majority of most disliked videos, including several that got media coverage for being the most disliked. I'm not necessarily opposed to merging some of these statistic articles, but any such merge needs to be orderly and not result in the deletion of content covered in reliable sources. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't call 57.5% overwhelming. The only information to be merged would be the paragraphs (the more interesting part) and the tables (in the form of a column). This pretty much covers everything presented on the page. I imagine it would be more fruitful to discuss liked/disliked videos in the single list would make more sense. The non-overlapping videos could be merged into the most viewed IMHO. I just do not see "most liked/disliked" as a valid criteria as a standalone topic. It is an interesting feature, do not get me wrong, just not a standalone topic. It is like having a list of article on most liked Facebook posts... -- A Certain White Cat chi? 00:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Also bear in mind that the like/dislike buttons are a more recent thing. In the past YouTube had a 5 star system to vote for videos. So this is not even a consistent metric. In the future, YouTube could change its algorithm to remove the 'dislike' button altogether for example. Or start ignoring some likes/dislikes to combat fake votes. How can we treat such an inconsistent standard a reliable source? -- A Certain White Cat chi? 09:14, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * -- A Certain White Cat chi? 18:40, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep well written, well sourced, not arbitrary. Lepricavark (talk) 03:51, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep referenced finite list. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Well-sourced and notable topic. Not arbitrary at all. I know this is irrelevant to AFDs but the page currently receives nearly 5000 views a day. AusLondonder (talk) 03:27, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep There is a long list of secondary and reliable sources to support the page, and I concur it is not arbitrary. --Hammersoft (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as per above. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   11:49, 16 February 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.