Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puppy-throwing marine video incident


 * 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   no consensus, and that is too bad. Those arguing to delete based upon WP:NOT had, in my estimation, the strongest individual arguments, however I cannot discount the volume and depth of the keep arguments, either. Honestly, the eventual fate of this article is likely to either get merged somewhere or outright deleted once the immediacy of the event has waned, but this argument clearly has not reached a consensus at this point. Shereth 19:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Puppy-throwing marine video incident

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article appears to cover a very minor incident of passing interest. As such, it seems to be a clear-cut violation of WP:NOT. Nick Dowling (talk) 10:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions.   —Nick Dowling (talk) 10:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.   —Nick Dowling (talk) 10:22, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Hardly notable, if anything a short sentence about the incident should be added to the main YouTube page rather than creating an article for itself. —— Ryan   |   t   •   c   10:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Virek (talk) 11:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Casualties of the Iraq War or Media Coverage of the Iraq War. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I was skeptical about the notability of this incident, but after having a look at on google news, I found that CNN, Associated Content (link is blacklisted), Unconfirmed Sources and HearldNET had reported on the incident. Which I think makes it notable. Atyndall93 | talk 12:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep (I am the initial editor) In case it isn't clear at first look to other editors here, my goal was simply to create an article about a viral video.  It's a rather tragic one, but nevertheless what the references appear to show as a notable internet phenomenon. It's really a stub, but the nominator's perspective is understable given that the article is in a very begining state and whose contents are still mostly references. --Firefly322 (talk) 12:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Non-notable. This guy's 15 minutes are up. Proxy User (talk) 13:36, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Plenty of good sources to establish notability of this incident, the fallout of which is still playing out. It's no Abu Gharib, but it's still a widely reported incident. Needs expansion to further explain the aftermath, though. 23skidoo (talk) 13:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)\
 * Merge per Col. Warden. If the coverage continues and it grows too large for that article, it can be broken out again. Jclemens (talk) 15:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The internet is loaded with reliable sources such as this, this, and this, which show me at least some notability. Although, I think the article should be renamed to something less complex. Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  16:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge either per Col. Warden or to Viral video. This video is very noteworthy, but deserving of its own page it is not. - Shiori (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOT (policy). MrPrada (talk) 23:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:NOT. No matter how many news agencies go over it, a slimeball lobbing a puppy off a cliff is not an encyclopedic event. How's it going to be expanded, A blow-by-blow account of the throw? Diagrams? Puppy-revolution count? There's little to add except a long list of people going "ick". If it did result in a changed law etc., and that was deemed notable itself, then this event would be nothing more than a few sentences within that article. Someoneanother 02:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This is more than just a news story. Alot of the sources are about the video, not the event itself. There have been responses, follow ups, and stories about the controversy of the video. -- Coasttocoast (talk) 04:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Viral videos can be notable, as evidenced by AFDs deciding to keep several of them, or at least no consensus to delete, such as the Obama Girl video I Got a Crush... on Obama (no consensus) or the video about an Asian girl whose dog pooped on a bus and she refused to clean it up, Dog poop girl (Keep in 3 afds). Star Wars kid, about a young man swing a golf ball retriever like a light saber (Keep in two AFDs). The video about a profane old Chinese man on a bus The Bus Uncle, appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 7, 2007. An old man cursing someone on a bus, a dog pooping on a bus, or a child swinging a golf ball retriever like a weapon is surely no more encyclopedic than a U.S. Marine killing a puppy, if the latter got enough news coverage. This one got substantial coverage in multiple independent and reliable sources. See List of Internet phenomena for more trivial things which became notable via the internet. This  not "media coverage" of a trivial event, as is addressed by WP:NOTNEWSsince no reporter made the video. It is an internet phenomenon. Edison (talk) 05:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOT. At best this deserves a mention in some relevant article on viral videos etc, but I don't think this rates as even that, at least not in this form. Summary: Someone made the video, according to a highly scientific method we have determined that people are "appalled", and the guy was fired. You can't get more newsarticley than that. Now allow me to disable the calm and collected part of my psyche for a while. *click* WILL YOU JUST LOOK AT THAT ARTICLE????++?? *click* See? Ordinary logic would tell me that this sort of articles are not encyclopaedic. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 09:32, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep It is an internet phenomenon and notable for the resulting backlash against him and his family.TheHuddledMasses (talk) 07:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC) — TheHuddledMasses (talk&#32;• contribs) 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.