Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tammo Tachtig
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Delete. Carlossuarez46 00:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Tammo Tachtig
- – (View log)
Article cites Uncyclopedia and is a non-notable internet meme. Spryde 11:03, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, non-notable meme. Also not sure how Uncyclopedia can prove anything. Blair - Speak to me 11:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete bestuff.com, and oncyclopedia.net are not reliable sources, and there are absolutely no references to this in Google that are reliable (only about 300 hits). Additionally, the article is a suspiciously close to being a copyvio of http://bestuff.com/stuff/tammo . Further, to me, this seems to possibly be a form of Protologisms "Articles on protologisms are almost always deleted as these articles are often created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term.". Ariel♥Gold 11:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete This is ridiculous. GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 20:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Why would it be ridiculous? thats not an argument. Knoppen op het toetsenbord 06:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)— Knoppen op het toetsenbord (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 06:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep widespread internet meme, plenty of sources available. Uncyclopedia does establish notability here, because the meme originated there. Wiskunde 06:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)— Wiskunde (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Keep per Wiskunde. Knoppen op het toetsenbord 06:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- It should be noted that the two editors above requesting to keep the article, created their accounts at exactly the same time, and both have no contributions outside of userspace, except to comment on this AfD, (within 2 minutes of each other), both creating talk pages with simply "hi" (lowercase), again at the same time and date. Ariel♥Gold 08:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Tammo is a rising star as an internet meme and is slowly but surely gaining popularity in all of the Netherlands. If the Flying Spaghetti Monster can have its own page. Tammo can too. 81.71.0.69 15:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment From what I can read, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a lot more widespread and notable than Tammo Tachtig. Besides which, the fact that another article exists is not a sufficient argument for keeping this article - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Blair - Speak to me 00:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment So you are saying that only the most popular things get te be on Wikipedia. If that's how it is why isn't the article about Korfbal deleted because Basketball is more popular? 81.71.0.69 06:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment No, I'm saying that a topic must be notable to be on Wikipedia. Korfball is a worldwide sport with national committees in at least 50 countries and regular world championships; hence it is notable enough for an article. Blair - Speak to me 07:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment So you are saying that only the most popular things get te be on Wikipedia. If that's how it is why isn't the article about Korfbal deleted because Basketball is more popular? 81.71.0.69 06:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment From what I can read, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a lot more widespread and notable than Tammo Tachtig. Besides which, the fact that another article exists is not a sufficient argument for keeping this article - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Blair - Speak to me 00:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment The AFD notice was removed from the article page on September 14 by 81.71.0.69 – I've relisted this discussion, hence the {{relist}} notice below this comment. KrakatoaKatie 03:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KrakatoaKatie 03:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. The normal order is, become an internet meme, then get written about by reliable sources, then get a Wikipedia article. --~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhartung (talk • contribs) 05:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Support per above. Is 81.71.0.69 Wiskunde's IP? Æetlr Creejl 05:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know for sure – I'm trying to assume good faith. However, based on their contributions and the timing, it's possible Wiskunde, Knoppen op, and 81.71.0.69 share socks or like the same meats. KrakatoaKatie 06:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete unless reliable sources establishing notability are provided. Searching appears to show that these will not be forthcoming. Nuttah68 07:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - Lack of acceptable sources is a fundamental flaw that is indicative of notability issues. /Blaxthos 14:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Clearly non-notable, article even admits it's a "rising star" of a meme. Call back once it's risen. eaolson 21:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:V and WP:N. No non-trivial coverage of subject by reliable sources. -- Satori Son 17:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Cute, but hardly notable. • Lawrence Cohen 22:37, 20 September 2007 (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.
