Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/To This Day


 * 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. Keep, per improvements to article and better referencing. While I agree with Tokyogirl79 that it popularity =/= notability, the new sourcing appears sufficient and reliable. Keeper |  76  16:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

To This Day

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

mostly sourced to youtube. author has appeared on HLN. topic (the poem) has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. fails WP:GNG. Nathan Johnson (talk) 16:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Theopolisme   ( talk )  01:10, 21 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, expand GNG. – SJ +  01:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per the GNG. Alternatively, redirect to Shane Koyczan. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  18:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Shane_Koyczan. The issue here is that most of the coverage focuses more about Koyczan and the subject of bullying rather than the poem itself. Many of the sources I'm finding are of the "hey, this poem was released, go check it out" variety. It's a start, but not really enough to show that it's a real depth of coverage at this point in time. Completely deleting the article outright would be a little rash, as there's a very real potential for this to gain more coverage and in-depth analysis in the future. It's just not there yet and while it'd be nice to keep a poem about bullying that has received a little attention, this is just WP:TOOSOON for its own article. I've added a section into Koyczan's article about the poem and for now it can redirect there. Right now the poem is popular, but popularity doesn't equate to notability on Wikipedia. It just makes it easier to find sources and right now everything is just reporting on the existence of the poem without any real in-depth analysis. The ones that are giving this more of a look aren't really the types of places that Wikipedia would consider a RS, unfortunately. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:37, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. New detail and decent refs added. Span (talk) 10:39, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. Current version bears no resemblance to version originally nominated. More than enough reliable sources have been presented to put this page past GNG. BusterD (talk) 16:24, 28 March 2013 (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.