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. – Steel 19:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

N64 Kid[edit]

N64 Kid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non notable internet phenomenon relating to a living person. Mainly concerns a U-tube video. Unreferenced. No need to have articles poking fun at people of borderline notability. WjBscribe 11:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep This article passes the de facto standard for inclusion, which is "will anyone come here for information on it?" Policy may differ, but ultimately, policy is not always the prevailing wind at AfD, something recognized by WP:IAR. I would not a vote to delete if the nomination cited credible factors other than general sympathy :x. —Adrian~enwiki (talk) 2007-02-27 11:37Z
  • I think Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 February 21/Brian Peppers establishes a precedent here. These kind of articles are of little encyclopedic value. The closest policy is WP:BLP. This article is going to be limited to negative information about the subject, with little room to counterbalance it. And if WP:BASICHUMANDIGNITY isn't policy yet, it should be. WjBscribe 11:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The _overall_ precedent doesn't apply until Jimmy Wales shows up and decides it by fiat ;)

I still maintain the argument I made a year ago in re. BP -- Wikipedia opens itself to potential liability by deleting articles on some requests and not others.

—Adrian~enwiki (talk) 2007-02-27 12:01Z

Delete -- actionable as unencyclopedic, but if evaluated only on issues of privacy or sympathy would be a keep. Editorial review will provide little or no equitable remedy to this guy's WP:BASICHUMANDIGNITY :) —Adrian~enwiki (talk) 2007-03-02 13:00Z

• Delete No non-trivial media coverage. Hipocrite - «Talk» 12:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The problem with this article is that video 'meme' was made by the article subject himself and posted to the internet without his permission so his entire notability claim is based on a copyright violation. You can't discuss the video if you can't link to it and WP:EL states we can't link to material we know to be a copyright violation. On top of that, it is a violation of his privacy. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I'm afraid I seriously messed up here. I got him confused with the Star Wars Kid. Please ignore my vote.- Mgm|^(talk) 12:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete; would not oppose a two-sentence mention in another article. The sourceable information from mainstream media is: 1) a brief description of the video; and 2) a brief description of its status as phenomenon, e.g. having been shown on Leno. Therefore a two-sentence description of the phenomenon could fit in another article somewhere, but there really isn't enough information in reliable sources for a standalone article---certainly his real name and so on do not appear in any mainstream media sources I've come across, so should not appear in Wikipedia. --Delirium 12:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete All sources to establish notability would be trivial (if they were actually used in the article). A clip on Jay Leno and appearing in a BMW commercial doesn't surpass the threshold required by WP:BIO. Leebo⁸⁶ 14:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and Hipocrite. At best this would be a quick mention in the "trivia" section of the Nintendo 64 article, not an article all its own. WP needs to get serious about cleaning out its Youtube/"internet phenomena" articles, as a lot of them are both blisteringly non-notable and make fun of non-public figures in an unencyclopedic (if not potentially libellous) way. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Were you by any chance a Sliders fan? —Adrian~enwiki (talk) 2007-02-27 21:04Z

• Delete He is already mention on the List of internet memes page (although I think that page should go since it's a matter of opinion on what's considered a meme). TJ Spyke 22:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no reliable sources provided. John Vandenberg 03:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to either Nintendo 64 or the list of internet memes. Being shown on Jay Leno's talk show and in a BMW commercial confers a minor but verifiable amount of notability. Not enough for a separate article, but certainly enough for a mention in a larger entry. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --pIrish 22:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination, as well. 65.6.50.112 16:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. GregorB 19:21, 5 March 2007 (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.