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. (non-admin closure) Ahsanullah2015 (talk) 15:45, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MEMZ[edit]

MEMZ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG; scanning the sources shows only a couple of articles from the same publisher that provides significant coverage. Multiple links listed are to YouTube, and a simple web search fails to garner significant media attention. From my understanding, multiple sources are needed to satisfy notability. Aasim (talk) 17:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Aasim (talk) 17:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Aasim (talk) 17:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Multiple sources aren't necessarily required in order for a topic to be notable, it is merely a good indicator that a topic is notable. I'm leaning towards a weak keep under the assumption that Motherboard is a satisfactory source. Mlb96 (talk) 23:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep Although many of the sources already cited in the article aren't massively reliable, the two Motherboard articles and this Vice article might be enough to keep it. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 13:38, 4 July 2021 (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.