Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jackson Jive


 * 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   merge to Hey Hey It's Saturday. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:25, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

The Jackson Jive

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Notability Tigerman2005 (talk) 01:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I've nominated this for deletion as I don't think it is notable enough for its own article. If Wikipedia is going to create a page for every minor controversy in the media, it is going to become full of meaningless and unencyclopaedic material. If this article belongs anywhere, it is as a paragraph in the main Hey Hey It's Saturday page. Tigerman2005 (talk) 01:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Grahame (talk) 01:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. An incident that sparked a response from Julia Gillard and interest from worldwide media eg  is sufficiently notable to warrant an article. WWGB (talk) 02:24, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with nominator. This is a completely trivial item which requires at the most a one line mention in the HHIS article. What next, an article on KFC advertisements? -- Mattinbgn (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - The epitomy of WP:NOT. One line mention on HHIS due to the dispiritingly widespread RS coverage.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 03:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge into the HHIS article. Reubot (talk) 05:51, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This seems to have not been listed yesterday. I have listed it now.-- Bduke   (Discussion)  08:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Already covered in sufficient detail at Hey Hey It's Saturday. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to Hey Hey It's Saturday. Sources provided do not provide significant coverage of this skit to condone its own article. Auseplot (talk) 21:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The sources provided in the article alone show how notable it is. This was a widely noted comedy sketch which created much debate and commentary, far removed from any definitions that could qualify it as a news event alone. It is a written work that can, and was, be performed, which became notable for its controversial content. I believe that it deserves it's own article, partially considering it's size. Lord Arador (talk) 01:28, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Having an article for every one-time comedy skit that offends someone-or-other enough to make the news borders on violating WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Fails every criterion in WP:MUSIC - except for WP:NEWS commentary about the offensiveness, NOT the merits of the performance. --Yeti Hunter (talk) 08:52, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This article definitely meets WP:MUSIC as far as those guidelines can speak to these types of performances. The notability of the show Hey Hey It's Saturday is not in question, and this article covers a musical performance on that show that garnered significant attention to create "enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article" WP:NSONGS. Under these circumstances it cannot be qualified as "news" because of WP:NTEMP. Lord Arador (talk) 13:12, 15 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge to Hey Hey It's Saturday. Yes, it was a flash in the pan news item, but I don't see any lasting significance.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC).
 * Redirect to Hey Hey It's Saturday or Hey Hey It's Saturday where it's already covered. Plausible search term, but no lasting coverage. Jenks24 (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to [[Hey Hey It's Saturday]]. does not warrant its own article. LibStar (talk) 04:53, 16 April 2011 (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.