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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:39, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of most discussed YouTube videos[edit]

List of most discussed YouTube videos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per the last deletion nomination, the article lacks the notability required to create a separate page, unlike List of most liked YouTube videos and List of most disliked YouTube videos. Although the page contains more sources than the last attempt at creating the page, all of the reliable sources do not discuss the most discussed YouTube videos, instead talking about the history of commenting on YouTube. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 15:38, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 19:23, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 19:23, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - arbitrary and subjective measurement. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or merge. While research on YouTube comments and its culture is certainly a topic of interest, a list of which videos have the most comments is not. 400,000 people saying "I like it" or "WORST SONG EVARRR" does not mean it is notable. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:02, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – The subject of the article is very interesting, though even the lead section which describes the history of Youtube commenting is riddled with original research (the second paragraph, for instance, uses Reddit, Youtube, and Imgur as sources). But, more importantly, the list itself is entirely original research that doesn't really have a place on Wikipedia. There exists no notable interest for "the video with the most discussion happening on it" or something of that ilk. This might be of interest for a Youtube fan-wiki, but not on Wikipedia, even just per general notability guidelines. ~Mable (chat) 13:19, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – I'm afraid Maplestrip has it right. The subject of the list itself (what videos have had the most discussion) has not received the requisite coverage in reliable sources to be notable, and this is represented by the reliance on original research (citing videos themselves, which is drawing a conclusion that the sources themselves do not explicitly state). I would recommend merging what material in the lead is reliably sourced into Google+#Commenting on YouTube. It is interesting, but it doesn't belong as a standalone article in this encyclopedia at this time. Mz7 (talk) 16:53, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for reasons given above and in the first AfD: arbitrary, even unreliable (I place no stock in the number of comments being reliable). Drmies (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Exactly the same reasoning as last time. The fatal flaw with the article is still present; it's still an (almost) completely arbitrary and non-notable measurement (not least because of the vast amount of spam comments). Thegreatluigi (talk) 20:12, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – I would argue that the list is, in fact, notable and not at all an arbitrary measurement. Between 2005 and 2012, YouTube included an honors section and up-to-date charts for videos that received notable rankings in categories such as the most viewed, liked, favorited, or discussed videos of the day/week/month/all-time. Yes, the number of comments on a video was one of the categories that YouTube kept track of. YouTube included a full chart comprised of videos in the "Most Discussed" category, as can be seen in these archived pages from 2012, 2011, 2007, and 2006, just to list a few. If the measurement of comments was non-notable or arbitrary, YouTube wouldn't have made and maintained a chart for it for 8 years. Some examples of how the Most Discussed Videos has been a topic of interest in the past include: these two books about YouTube video marketing, published in 2009, which frequently refer to the "Most Discussed" list in their findings; at the end of 2010, YouTube Trends published a list of most discussed videos of the year; in 2012, the website "News & Guides" published a list of most discussed videos of all time; in 2014, Time published a list of most popular videos of the year, stating: “The top 10 wasn’t determined by view count alone, but rather by a more nebulous formula that includes "views, shares, comments, likes and more," according to YouTube.” This is a clear indication that the number of comments on a video is important and is taken into consideration when determining popularity. Videos that spark the most discussion, for whatever reason, should have their own article just like the most liked, disliked, and viewed videos do. As for reliability, the source for this article is the same as the sources for those three articles. In response to Maplestrip's comment: “There exists no notable interest for "the video with the most discussion happening on it" or something of that ilk. This might be of interest for a Youtube fan-wiki, but not on Wikipedia”, the same could be said about a large portion of Wikipedia articles as well. Many articles are so specific that they only appeal to a very small fraction of users, yet they remain on Wikipedia because the information is useful to the few it applies to. Given the additional details I've provided, I believe this article should not be deleted. --MattStan10 (talk) 23:56, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Although your analysis is lengthy, it is very flawed. First, YouTube doesn't have any honors for the "Most Discussed Videos" anymore. Second, the fact that two books mention a "most discussed" section doesn't warrant a Wikipedia article, especially when there are entire articles that talk about List of most liked YouTube videos [1] and List of most disliked YouTube videos [2]; for "Most discussed YouTube videos", only three articles on Google News. Third, the websites that you linked regarding "The Most Commented YouTube Videos" are not notable (such as "News and Guides", which hasn't posted an article since 2013, and "Youtube Trends", which is a Blog.) Fourth, although Time Magazine is a great source, the fact the article vaguely mentioned the comments of a video doesn't give the topic any notability. In a single sentence, there are no notable sources that provide a list of the "most discussed YouTube videos". Plus, you recreated this article even though it was previously deleted. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 01:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I understand that YouTube got rid of the honors feature but that doesn't diminish the fact that they had it for 8 years and maintained up-to-date charts on the most discussed videos until the end of 2012. If this article was created when YouTube still had the charts, would it still be deleted, despite the fact that YouTube itself felt it was significant enough to keep track of? Also, the YouTube Trends page that I linked to was created and is operated by YouTube, so I would consider it to be a notable source. When I created the article in October I had no idea it was previously made and deleted. I just felt there should've been an article for the most discussed videos since there was one for every other major YouTube category. I figured it was a notable enough topic since YouTube used to provide charts about it for years, and I figured the source was reliable enough since similar sources have been used for other similar articles. --MattStan10 (talk) 09:09, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• It's like you read the first part of my argument and skimmed through the rest. First, this category is simply not notable because there are not any reliable sources that cover this topic. Also, the fact that YouTube had this topic for eight years does not make it notable. You questioned "If this article was created when YouTube still had the charts, would it still be deleted, despite the fact that YouTube itself felt it was significant enough to keep track of?" The answer is yes because there are no reliable secondary sources that cover this list. Second, I had made the mistake of calling YouTube Trends simply as "a Blog". What I meant to say is that it is a Blog run by the official site. Citing this source would violate WP:OR because you would cite YouTube itself. I am aware in all of the YouTube related lists cite directly to the YouTube videos, but the information in the lead paragraph in those articles contain sources from good secondary sources. Furthermore, even if we could cite this, this list originated from 2010; there are no similar lists from this current year. Finally, you said when you created this article in October, you had no idea that it was deleted. That is a lie, because Wikipedia would notify that the article in question had been deleted prior to creating the article, as seen in this image. In conclusion, my point still stands that measuring YouTube comments is not a notable metric, even back then when YouTube itself used to measure it. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps you're right. I initially considered the former YouTube Charts [3] and YouTube Trends Blog [4] to be notable sources, but after reading WP:GNG I can understand the reasoning for why the topic may not be notable enough to warrant a stand-alone list. Maybe if the topic receives significant coverage from reliable sources in the future, it may be worthy of its own article, but not at this time. --MattStan10 (talk) 21:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Who knows what may happen in the following years :) ~Mable (chat) 21:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I doubt that reliable sources would discuss about the "Most Discussed YouTube videos", especially when none was given when YouTube had the category. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 00:35, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Anything is possible. The Guinness World Records includes records for the most comments on a Weibo post [5] and the most comments on a Facebook item [6] so it's possible that one day they (or other sources) could discuss the most comments on YouTube videos. --MattStan10 (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• The records set by Guinness World Records deal only with the top comment of a particular post, and not an entire list of posts (as the article tries to present). Yoshiman6464 (talk) 04:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the same as I've said in my first post - will look forward to the list of most trolled Youtube videos in the near future. Donnie Park (talk) 12:48, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Trolling is not quantifiable, even if it is much more reported upon. This seems like a fallacy of some sort ^_^; ~Mable (chat) 13:06, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: This is a wildly subjective piece of fancruft that is ill-defined to be measured. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 01:56, 3 January 2017 (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.