Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/This is My Milwaukee


 * 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   keep.  MBisanz  talk 09:45, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

This is My Milwaukee

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

Fails WP:N. This article is based upon a odd video on YouTube that is possibly a Alternate Reality Game. I say "possibly" because this thing started last Tuesday. The people playing this game have created their own private Wiki, so this is article is not needed. dposse (talk) 04:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC) (talk) 20:12, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks independent verification to assert its notability.  Royal broil  04:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Somehow it seems cool even though I have no idea what the game is about. But no notability suggested or indicated. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep For an obvious ARG barely a week old, it is already just shy of 1000 google results. I don't think I Love Bees was more popular in the first week, and it seems silly to remove the article now so that it can be re-added in a month or so when a lot more information is known about it.  Here's the Alexa data.  Just because there's an article on some random wiki somewhere does not mean there shouldn't be one on Wikipedia.  There's a wiki for Star Wars (the Wookiepedia), but does that mean all links related to star wars have been sent to a Soft Redirect to Wookiepedia?  That, to me, is not a logical response. --TIB (talk) 20:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - You're comparing this to Star Wars? How? This began last Tuesday as a weird 10 minute video on YouTube, a small website and a phone number. No one knows what this is for, but so far, this does not have nearly the impact of Nine Inch Nails's Year Zero which is actually notable. The largest website i've seen this mentioned on is Digg and SomethingAwful. It's not nearly in the same league as Year Zero. dposse (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Well, I'm certainly not interested in Star Wars, but I don't think it should be relegated to a separate wiki. I suppose because this ARG (and it is very hard to believe it is anything but) wasn't advertised on a high profile location like the end of a Halo ad or wherever Year Zero was advertised, that it's not yet notable? --TIB (talk) 03:35, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep It appears to be not only popular but part of an official production of the Milwaukee Tourism Committee, which if not making it notable as its own article, at least makes it notable enough that the information should be kept on Wikipedia. If this AfD somehow passes, the information should definitely be merged into a section of the article on Milwaukee, WI.  Based on the initial data of online response to this viral video, I would say that it's probably notable on its own. 12.226.169.154 (talk) 03:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think someone pointed out that the Milwaukee Tourism Commission is not real, and that Milwaukee's actual tourism organization is called the Milwaukee Visitors' Bureau. This MTC is made up for the video/game/whatever it is, so shoudl be judged on its own. Rmbjspd (talk) 05:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment MTC doesn't exist. Keep nonetheless for reasons below. --Samvscat (talk) 05:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, despite unclear origins (the "Milwaukee Tourism Committee" is a sham, it doesn't exist), the thing is captivating and it's growing quickly. There are supplemental videos out already so this thing is definitely going somewhere. As TIB said, if it gets deleted now, it will just come back in a few weeks when we know more about it. Might as well keep it around to add details as they come. --Samvscat (talk) 05:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP has documented other viral marketing campaigns and ARGs, I see no reason for this to be excluded from that group. Further, it's notability is increasing, leaving little room for deletionists to raise valid objections. burnte (talk) 19:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I believe this passes WP:N. True, it's a relatively new game, but searching through the Googles shows a huge amount of hits and interest.    Flying  Toaster  04:16, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. How can there be an encyclopedic article when we don't even know what we're writing about? No reliable sources to show notability; when some show up, I will have no problem with it having an article. At the momment, there's no notability (as opposed to popularity, which it clearly does have). Fails WP:NOTNEWS, WP:N and frankly, very little to pass WP:V.  Xymmax  So let it be written   So let it be done  05:48, 30 November 2008 (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.