Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pen-Pineapple-Apple-Pen


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. Delete !votes not a significant proportion of the total. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Pen-Pineapple-Apple-Pen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

YouTube views, a Bieber tweet, and filler stories by news sites do not make a stub article's topic notable. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 18:15, 10 October 2016 (UTC) Withdrawn, taking to PROM with singer's article. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 00:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. In-depth coverage by the BBC, CNN , The Straits Times , India Today , and CTV  among others would show that the subject meets WP:GNG.  Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:38, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * All news sites publish filler sometimes. We really need to cut down on YouTube and internet meme coverage per WP:NOTKNOWYOURMEME. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 19:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If reliable sources cover it, it's legitimate coverage of cultural phenomena. There are plenty of well-sourced articles on Youtube stars and internet memes on Wikipedia. WP:IDONTLIKEIT isn't a reason for deletion if the sourcing is there. Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:45, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If there are sources, import it to Wikinews and rewrite it completely a) to be more news-y and b) for CC-BY-2.5 compliance. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 20:50, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * "If" isn't the question, I've shown that it clearly does and is a well-sourced cultural phenomenon that meets general notability guideline for coverage. Wikinews is a terrible Wikimedia project anyway. As for lasting coverage, this is well into its second week of coverage and international reliable sources have talked about its popularity in the Philippines, Wales, Hong Kong  and India .  Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:06, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

*Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. All of the sources are simply gee-whiz news stories over a week or two. (It seems that events have overtaken us and this has charted in Japan, and maybe elsewhere. 16:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)) 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:38, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete No prejudice to re-creation if this song somehow charts on Billboard, but as-is just another viral video filling time on newscasts and viral video shows until the seven-day forecast rehash.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:39, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per User:Mrschimpf and User:86.17.222.157, it is not news. But if it really becomes a music album of some sort, not just a viral video, I'd suggest to keep it. ∞😃 Target360YT 😃∞ (talk · contribs) 02:00, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, but keep until trend is over. As per above, it should definitely be deleted as per WP:NOTNEWS. However, since it is still ongoing, I suggest we keep this article for now and renominate it immediately for speedy deletion about 3-4 months later. XFusionSGX (talk) 06:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * That's not the way Wikipedia, in particular WP:NOTNEWS, works. We don't keep articles while their topics are in the news and then delete them afterwards, but rather wait until they have been shown to have more than fleeting coverage before writing an article. A more policy-compliant way to deal with this would be to delete it for now and then recreate it if it later transpires that it has lasting notability beyond the current news cycle. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:43, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Now that it is notable and it has even topped the charts, my stance now is to just simply keep it per WP:GNG and WP:NSONG as below. XFusionSGX (talk) 04:03, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. As Patar knight notes, this video has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources worldwide. This is not routine coverage, the song is described as a "viral sensation". Who are Wikipedia editors to decide if a topic is "filler" or not? That smacks of IDONTLIKEIT. The coverage has persisted for weeks so is not just one news cycle. If editors really must not have an article on this, then the content must be merged to Daimaou Kosaka, the comedian who created the song. Don't go thinking about deleting that bio - check his Japanese Wikipedia bio, he's definitely notable there and what's notable in Japan is notable for English Wikipedia too. Fences  &amp;  Windows  18:21, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Of course it's routine coverage. For a few days in late September there were news reports that this was a "viral sensation", but such news reports over any other few days, or other news outlets over the same few days, will routinely describe something else as a "viral sensation". The fact that many journalists are too lazy to look beyond what's trending on Twitter or wherever doesn't mean that we should emulate them. This is precisely the kind of situation that WP:NOTNEWS is designed for. And, no, I wouldn't dream about asking for the deletion of the article on Daimaou Kosaka, but his notability is not inherited by everything he creates. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:37, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Given the coverage of the song and the notability of its creator, it seems that merging the content to the creator's page is what should occur instead of deletion, if the delete !votes have it. Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:06, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree per User:Patar knight. Merging is a good idea so solve the problem. I'd say Keep this article until the trend is over, then Merge into Daimaou Kosaka. Also, leaving a redirect is a good idea as pageview statistics are over the top. ∞😃 Target360YT 😃∞ (talk · contribs) 12:14, 13 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep obvious WP:GNG pass. SST  flyer  12:37, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If still not convinced, try searching for Japanese sources. SST  flyer  12:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * From WP:NOTNEWS: "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events". Maybe younger editors have a different attention span, but as far as I'm concerned a few weeks is not "enduring". Would we consider a topic to have enduring notability if it got a couple of weeks of coverage in, say, 1966 rather than 2016? 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * That would be more of an issue of WP:RECENTism than anything else I'd think too. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:30, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Pen-Pineapple-Apple-Pen is a piece of music on sales at iTunes . And it sells in 134 countries . So, if this is removed, all song titles will be removed. Carl Daniels (talk) 19:32, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep It has debuted on the Japan Hot 100 at number 4 and charted on the US Bubbling Under Hot 100 Singles, thus passing WP:NSONG. The song and video has received plenty of coverage in reliable sources as well. —SomeoneNamedDerek (talk) 20:30, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – Passes WP:NSONG, having received enough coverage to qualify for an article and per having charted on two Billboard charts: Bubbling Under Hot 100 and Japan Hot 100. North America1000 21:29, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't pass it for Bubbling Under, but Billboard Japan Hot 100 is notable. If it hits Oricon, then it'll be notable for sure. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 00:53, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep – Unlike many viral songs, this song has actually charted on various charts. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 22:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. I haven't read the above discussion but this has now come up at RfD, or rather a redirect to it, at Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_October_13. There, we're discussing the redirect not the article, but one will follow the other. Nominated at RfD by User:SSTflyer, who has not commented here or there, but I see a couple of regs here from RfD, User:AngusWOOF and User:Patar knight, all of which are regs at RfD. The R will have to follow the article, not the other way around, so there is little point discussing it at the RfD. Si Trew (talk) 11:25, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep The song may be viral, but it's charted, so to me at least it would meet WP:NSONG. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:30, 14 October 2016 (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.