Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Who Made Huckabee? (3rd nomination)


 * 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. I don't see how this is a Good Article--I'd tag it for excessive detail right off the bat. However, SNOW keep applies to this AfD as well as to the previous two. I'm tempted to let this run just so this can pile up a ton of keeps, but there's no point in that. The horse is dead, now leave it be. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Who Made Huckabee?
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This fails WP:GNG. GA status and WP:ILIKEIT do not a notable article make. There are secondary sources, yes, but there's sources for everything on TV; don't see anything explaining how this made a notable impact on media, culture, etc. Instaurare (talk) 07:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Snow keep. It's frankly ludicrous to AfD a well-sourced GA that was speedy-kept at its previous AfD only two months ago and kept at the AfD before that. Dricherby (talk) 11:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep was a non-admin closure; as stated, GA status does not create notability. Instaurare (talk) 17:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter who closed it: the consensus was clear. GA status does not create notability but one of the GA criteria is that an article be well-sourced and that demonstrates the "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" required by WP:GNG. We have sources from the New York Times, ABC, Fox all of which have this "feud" as their main subject. Hey, there's even a citation to Chuck Norris and if that doesn't make a subject notable, nothing does! What?  Chuck Norris isn't mentioned in WP:GNG, you say?  Oh well.  Stoopid guidelines.  Anyway, where was I?  Oh, yeah.  I think I was going to say something about how WP:GNG also doesn't set the unreasonably high bar that you've chosen that TV shows must make "a notable impact on media, culture, etc."  WP:ILIKEIT is a strawman, since nobody has argued along those lines. Dricherby (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets GNG as the previous AFD determined. Being a good article has nothing to do with notability. AIR corn (talk) 12:32, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Per Aircorn. 069952497aComments and complaintsStuff I've done 14:27, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Well sourced & written and per all of the above reasons as well. DP 76764  (Talk) 14:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Easily meets WP:GNG. Also per reasons stated previouly by various commenters--Cjv110ma (talk) 20:34, 20 May 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.