Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Operation Fourth Wave Feminism


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 00:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Operation Fourth Wave Feminism

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Recent discussion on the talk page between me and generated two suggestions as to what to do with the page, now that half the History section has been removed: Get rid of the rest and write a new article on the bikini bridge; Recast the article as "2014 4chan Anti-Feminism Operations". Both suggestions would probably end us up here anyway, so I think we should come here now and 'get it out the way'. It would help gain a wider hearing. Laun chba  ller  19:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete As one of the people having participated on the talk page, I found this page while patrolling on WP:HUGGLE and reverted the IP user blanking content. Then, I've reviewed the article and found a bunch of errors as well as original research connecting '4chan hoaxes' to this operation. Only two sources mention 'Operation Fourth Wave Feminism' explicitly; Daily Dot and Jezebel. While reliable, the other sources mention it in the context of a 4chan hoax and not apart of 'operation fourth wave feminism'. It relies on the other sources, which make no mention of the topic specifically at hand to attempt to meet the general notability guideline. Two sources do not an article make. In addition, you can view the other section 'free bleeding' in this diff, which I removed because it was original research to the connection at hand. Daily Dot mentioned it briefly but did not say that it was apart of "Operation fourth wave feminism". All in all, I believe that because of the majority of sources do not explicitly mention 'Operation Fourth Wave Feminism', in which sources are required to be related to the article's topic; I !vote that this article be deleted.  Tutelary (talk) 20:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: As the creator of this article, it has been damaged beyond repair, given that you believe a tabloid falling for a 4chan hoax is now considered unreliable. Wikipedia is not Know Your Meme. ViperSnake151   Talk  22:07, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete The bikini bridge affair might merit a mention on 4chan but this is less significant and there seems to be real questions over the reliability of sources. Certainly not enough coverage to be independently notable. --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:26, 17 June 2014 (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.