Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokèmon Kid


 * 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 of the debate was When anons and accounts with negligable numbers of edits are discounted, the 'vote' is in admins discresssion. Ste strength of the argument seems to be with DELETE. -Doc ask?  12:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Pokèmon Kid
While this internet phenomenon has gained some popularity since its start the previous month, I think it will be forgotten by the end of February. Mind you that the notability guidelines are sort of broken when it comes to internet memes, so the 13,000 Google hits should probably be taken with a pinch of salt. Comparing it to the Star Wars kid, it seems like this one hasn't generated one single spin-off video. When voting, please don't base it upon whether you've seen it or not, but if you think people will be talking about it in a few months. O bli (Talk) 18:34, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. nn.  [[Image:Monkeyman.png]]Monkeyman 19:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Internet fad wanna-be -- Ruby  20:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Good number of hits, found on notable websites and damn ass funny. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.54.227.145 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Keep We cannot delete articles based on whether or not their subjects will still be popular. We aren't psychics. The original nomination for deletion confuses me, and appears to either come out of boredom, spite, or both. It almost seems as if he/she is attempting to rule out any eligibility this video has for remaining in Wiki; how can you tell people not to consider the fact that it has 13,000 Google hits? Consider it this way: An actor or actress who appears in one or two small roles in major Hollywood films, or large roles in one or two obscure indy films, still qualifies for articles in Wiki (ie, Angela Bettis). Their "impact" is no greater than this kid. I also would like to point out that, since this article went up two days ago, nearly 2000 non-Wiki related pages have been added to his "resume" on Google. 2000 pages in three days should tell you something.TimmyBIsCool 23:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, found on numerous notable websites such as eBaum's, I Am Bored, Best Week Ever, IFILM, Planet Vids, Milk and Cookies, etc. Also, sites such as Planet Vid and Best Week are already beginning to draw the parallels with Numa NUma and Star Wars kid. If Pokemon Kid gets canned we might as well delete those too.23:51, 19 February 2006 (UTC)~
 * Editing above comment to add links of notable pages that favorably compare this meme to Star Wars kid:
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * And to Numa NUma:
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * I also refer to this old deletion page on another, considerably more obscure meme. That was allowed to remain on the basis of a significantly smaller number of Google hits. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.242.12.153 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Keep notable internet memes. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 14:05, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, legit meme 216.7.248.254 16:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Considering the number of Wikipedia entries about old, highly unpopular movies or obscure equally "unpopular" scientific states, popularity is not a relevant reason for deletion. It hasn't been long enough to decide wether this fad is useful or not, either.  Can you honestly say that it is useless? --Anoma lee 11:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, the google hits will stay around long after this has died, Google has a long memory and thus any internet fad will survive the notability criteria, one hit wonder or not. O bli (Talk) ? 11:32, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per Anoma lee. However, the accent in the title is wrong, so if this is kept move it to Pokémon Kid, which currently redirects to the misaccented current title. Stifle 16:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Any Internet meme less than a year old has no credence here, IMHO. It's ridiculous to submit an article after five nanoseconds of exposure. D e nni &#9775;  02:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Definitely Keep. Internet Phenomenon's like this are exceptionally interesting now, and I can only imagine how interesting they will be to people looking back 5, 10, or 50 years from now. There is actual historic value to these phenomena. Cambios 23:12, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Abstain, but the title should at least be spelled correctly. Ardric47 23:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. O bli (Talk) ? 23:59, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, part of our internet heritage. Meme is important!RudyLucius 17:03, 24 February 2006 (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.