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 of the debate was no consensus to delete the article. Mailer Diablo 00:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chuck Norris Facts[edit]

Keep.It's part of a pop culture phenomena. It may only be a fad, but Chuck Norris Facts have proven to be rather popular among college-age people. Besides, there's unlimited space in the Wikipedia universe; no reason to eliminate this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:(({1))}|(({1))}]] ([[User talk:(({1))}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/(({1))}|contribs]])

Chuck Norris Facts have been a continuing phenomina that deserves reference. I would say that by now, the phases have entered a sort of cultural lexicon, and thus, should be given credit where credit is due.

This is already covered in the Chuck Norris page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jontimbo (talk • contribs) 6 March 2006

Just ban the fools who making these Chuck Norris jokes. Common sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.76.0.33 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 6 March 2006

PLease keep!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.43.122.76 (talk • contribs) 6 March 2006

Keep If u dont keep chuck norris may just give u a roundhouse kick to the face --ThaWalk--

Keep. Chuck Norris Facts are a big part of internet culture and deserve a seperate inclusion in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.188.39 (talk • contribs) 4 March 2006

Delete, redirect to Chuck Norris. This so-called meme has grown entirely out of hand. Wikipedia is not a place for random memes- this article is not enclyopedic in the least. This should simply redirect to the Chuck Norris page, and leave all prominent iformation there. It is nothing more than a page full of vandalism and unfunny 'facts' as it is. Rimsy 19:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. - Samsara _contrib ^talk 19:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per Rimsy. -Spiffy42 19:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into Chuck Norris. Chairman S. ^Talk 20:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. I originally thought about voting keep for this one, but after going to the subject's entry on the internet phenomenon page, there really isn't anything more to say about this article other than the single sentence. Redirect to internet phenomenon. Isopropyl 20:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. One roundhouse kick from Chuck Norris saved a vanispamcruftvertisement article from deletion. Isopropyl 20:53, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Trim and Merge. The countless examples can be deleted, because they just inspire more people to add their own examples. But some comment on the fad, and Chuck's response to it should be merged into the Chuck Norris page itself. Maelwys 21:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, but the phenomenon is real, so it should be mentioned on the Chuck Norris page. Maybe trim and merge would be appropriate, as suggested above. We definitely DON'T want Wikipedia to become a source for new "Chuck Norris facts" or a compendium of them. There's already too much trivia being archived on Wikipedia! This degrades its value as an encyclopedia, IMHO. Slowmover 21:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Feels like kicked out from Uncyclopedia and trying to find home here. Pavel Vozenilek 21:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the article clearly establishes notability and media coverage. — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 21:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Chuck Norris and cleanup, removing the unencyclopædic 'facts'. Mention of the phenomenon and Norris' response will be enough to keep this on the level for WP.  (aeropagitica)  23:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, make a mention of it on the Chuck Norris page, note that he's acknowledged them. That really dshould be enough. -Rmzy717 AT SCHOOL 01:40, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Chuck Norris, regardless of how popular it might be at some schools or at some places, the random fact generator isn't exclusive towards Chuck Norris. Douglasr007 02:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unencyclopedic. -- Krash (Talk) 02:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This absolutely must be kept. One of the best things about wikipedia is it's ability to have current social phenomenon in it's archives. The loss of this article would set a precedent that would in the end do nothing to benefit the stated goal of wikipedia. This does not degrade it's value at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.252.179 (talk • contribs) 2006-03-02 19:05:08 (5th edit)
• Keep and Cleanup I think that this article is in need of some cleanup and some wikifying, but it should be kept. Why? Well, it's an internet phenomenon (i see it quite a bit). Wikipedia has articles about other internet phenomenons as well. In fact, that's one of the reasons i really like Wikipedia...you can find stuff here you wouldn't be able to find any where else. I mean, we have articles about Badger badger badger and The End of the World and Peanut Butter Jelly Time and even Every time you masturbate… God kills a kitten. I think that as an internet phenomenon, this is as worthy of a place on wikipedia as those other articles! I do agree that it needs some clean up. --Quadraxis 03:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If Chuck Norris wanted an article he would kick everyone at the Jordanhill railway station in the teeth and take the millionth article position. --maclean25 04:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and cleanupThe phemonenon is real (Even I, who normally would frown on such an activity, have submitted "facts." It's an internet meme and so needs to be kept. Or, delete but also delete Badger badger badger and Homestar Runner and All your base are belong to us and The Numa-Numa dance and so on and so forth. --Thenobleageofsteam 8:44, 2 March 2006
• Keep. Notable Internet phenomenon, even though it is no "All your base are belong to us." Crypticfirefly 06:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nn and annoying fad MLA 09:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - unverifiable, Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 10:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The current version of the page is OK. Other memes are repertoried on the site, so why couldn't this one? Plus, it grew out beyond the internet, becoming a huge part of popular culture. Keep. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.217.228.187 (talk • contribs) 07:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Keep it! This has become a huge thing, and isn't Wikipedia supposed to be moving foward, not backwards? Claudius8110
  • User's first edit -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 14:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, redirect to Chuck NorrisIt's surprising how widespread this is, but should be added to the Chuck Norris page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.43.38.133 (talk • contribs) 10:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. If there's a section on Vin Diesel facts, this thing should stay. Besides, if we delete it, people will start adding this stuff to the Chuck Norris page again. Samantha17 19:22, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Chuck Norris. I can't believe you want to delete it! In some countries (like Poland) they're extremely popular. In some maybe not, but that's not a reason for deletion. Also, keep at most 2 examples and mercilessly remove any additions by trolls. The roundhouse kick on the laws of physics is a good one. We could add "Chuck Norris has negative pings" (my favorite) for the geeks and keep it that way. Misza13 ^{T C E} 21:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This meme is a real, notable Internet phenomenon. SweetP112 21:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - This is a notable enough internet fad to garner discussion, and merging it into Chuck Norris would open the possibility of cluttering up Norris' page with things that are just barely related to the man himself. --Visual77 22:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it's a real internet phenomenon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaybenad (talk • contribs) 17:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: isn't this basically the same idea as an Elephant joke? If Elephant jokes get their own page, why not this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.63.100.162 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, don't merge with Chuck Norris. -- Curps 01:47, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep notable internet memes, and this even reaches the absurdly strict standards of being mentioned in major media to boot, including Tony Danza's talk show and The Best Damn Sports Show Period. Poor nomination. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 05:09, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep How can you say it's made up in school one day if it circulated on the internet? --Antoshi~! ^{T | C} 10:10, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and Cleanup. As far as memes go, this one has made a fairly large splash. But the article is indeed a bit of a mess. It should be kept if someone is willing to go about the business of making it encyclopedic --Yst 12:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as this is really a big thing outside of Wikipedia. Pepsidrinka 20:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I found the article useful. Someone was sending me these Chuck Norris facts one day, and I had no idea why until I found this article. That's one of the things I love about Wikipedia; you can find stuff in it that no one else will take the time to explain. --Alexwagner 20:34, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Seems notable enough to me. 22:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and cleanup per aeropagirica Nick Catalano (Talk) 23:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge. Contrary to popular belief, it was Chuck Norris, not meteors or climate change, that killed the dinosaurs. --DDerby-(talk) 02:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Edit down and merge. This page is a mess in its current form, and cannot be expanded on, really. It's also a page that looks like it could attract vandalism, but then again, if this was deleted, it would be some other page that does it. Whatever the case, whichever page it gets merged to should still have the link to the chucknorrisfacts.com. Crazyswordsman 03:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep While clearly a fad, the Chuck Norris Facts phenemonon is probably notable enough to merit a page. The article needs some cleanup, though. --Viridian || (Talk) 08:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - This is clearly it's own internet fad, although the article does need some work. --Askaggs 15:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This article reflects a minor internet trend and although not perfect, it is valuable. It should be improved and possibly broadened to reflect other similar trends, but definitely not merged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.202.18 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 6 March 2006
• Keep. It's a notable Internet phenomenon that deserves its own article. Imaginaryoctopus^(talk) 02:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable meme. This should be kept separate from Chuck Norris, though this discussion has no bearing on that particular decision. android79 20:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep If "all your base" gets a page, this is certainly worth a page. 67.188.192.110 21:58, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep notable Internet phenomenon. --Maxamegalon2000 22:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.