Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Regular Ordinary Swedish Meal Time

=Hasty action without reasonable discussion=

All other suggestions of where to continue this discussion are pages which do not exist or were deleted, so I will do it here, since this does not constitute editing the archive itself. I would firstly like to point out that the discussion includes posts from a total of 5 people, only three of whom voice opinions to delete, and who do not demonstrate knowledge of the issue. The action was then taken after only one week, denying others like me the chance to participate. For instance, this is not a single video as suggested by the statement of Piuro, "[E]very temporarily popular internet video should have its own Wikipedia page," but in fact a series of many videos. The act was only begun recently (so we can't say if the effect is temporary), and while I have not fully counted statistics on all videos, the older ones do have around 3.5 million views, which is not a triviality. This is in fact about 25% of the views for a popular Epic Meal Time YouTube video, which has a detailed Wikipedia article, and even its own production now. Tokyogirl79 states that, "[n]ot actual articles discussing the series itself. A gsearch didn't bring anything up that would show notability." Oddly, even the Epic Meal Time Wikipedia article has a link to eater.com for ROSMT. Even being in Tokyo myself, I can't see what kind of Google search was performed, as I can readily pull up for instance an interview at spreadshirt.net and an article at the LA Weekly in just 10 seconds. To me this feels more like a refusal to productively improve an article which could be improved and instead delete it. In fact, the only valid objection I can see that might have been made was based on the statement, "This page page was created by the creators of this Youtube series (see the discussion thread, where the article creator introduced themselves)" which suggests a conflict of interest, but even this simple argument is not made. This is a point worth supporting, and of course more objective editors are required. Anyone crusading like this is suggested also to go delete the Swedish language page of the same name. I will await the discussion before reviving the page from the archives and improving it myself. DAID (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2011 (UTC)