Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Techno House 2022

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Sandstein (talk | contribs) at 09:33, 12 March 2022 (→‎Battle of Techno House 2022: Closed as delete (XFDcloser)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. The history can be restored via WP:REFUND if a serious attempt is made to create an article about social media in the current war, but consensus is that this meme on its own isn't notable. Sandstein 09:33, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Techno House 2022

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Battle of Techno House 2022 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete as non-notable. This fails wp:recentism RockstoneSend me a message! 03:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. RockstoneSend me a message! 03:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As the creator of the article, the meme has been widely reported, in RS, and has gone on to create other memes. It appears to have become a general point of derision of the Russian army, in particular as an indicator of how inept/poorly trained they are (or ill-disciplined, assuming the soldier, Andrei Paktishev is just gaining entry to the shop so he can loot it). According to the RS, Ukrainians have used it as a meme to mock Russia. I will also note there has been an attempt at G3Speedy delete which failed, and it has remained, with many editors improving it since. I've tried to add as much RS as possible to improve it. Discussion of the meme has also discussed the Wikipedia page for it, so IMHO just a bit of interesting media commentary on Wikipedia and how our articles cover these events.Deathlibrarian (talk) 03:17, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As creator of the article, I have changed my vote to delete. Its clear that in the end, this meme didn't have any enduring significance - its a short life meme. Fails under Wikipedia is not a newspaper.I have not voted for a redirect, as there isn't an appropriate place for it to be re-driected to - some editors have suggested the battle for Kherson, but IMHO its really not relevent to that page and wouldn't be a good fit. I would however say that the coverage of the wikipedia article was interesting and of note.Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:43, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kherson offensive or at least 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, where it could be covered in a section on popular culture. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 14:09, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Considering some of the comments here, I have changed my vote back to Keep. While I'm confident, as a meme alone, there is probably no enduring notability, and this fails under WP:NOT because Wikipedia is not a newspaper - the article, and much of the commentary focusses on the Wikipedia article, including the title of the meme itself which is a direct reference to Wikipedia "Battle of XXXX Year" articles. As such, I think there is more to the article than appears at first hand. I don't really think its a great look for editors to removing commentary/media references to Wikipedia itself. In addition, I actually think there is value to keeping the reference, as a comment on Wikipedia. Deathlibrarian (talk) 07:47, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Battle of Kherson or Delete. Per WP:N, there are two requirements for us to presume an article to be merited: (1) that it is notable under WP:GNG/WP:SNG; and (2) that the article subject is not excluded under the policy on what Wikipedia is not. This article clearly fails on both counts. With respect to the first criterion, viral phenomena are within the scope of WP:NEVENT. The relevant notability guideline states that Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths, celebrity or political news, "shock" news, stories lacking lasting value such as "water cooler stories," and viral phenomena) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance. There is no reporting at this time that distinguishes this viral phenomenon from other viral phenomena and memes that get reported on all the time. Simply put, this absolutely fails WP:NEVENT. For a similar reason; this also fails the second criterion listed in WP:N—this fails WP:NOT because Wikipedia is not a newspaper. As the policy states, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion and routine news reporting... is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. For a viral meme to merit an article, it would need to be one that is unusually likely to hold enduring significance. The reporting present in the article's sources, however, suggests that it is not unlike other memes-of-the-day; I see no reason that this merits a wholesale article at this time. I am indifferent between redirecting this to the article that describes the battle during which the incident occurred and deleting the article wholesale, but I strongly oppose a keep. Wikipedia is not Know Your Meme. — Mhawk10 (talk) 03:55, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a newspaper IMHO does not apply here. Clearly the event generally, in the context of the War, is more important than a simple news event of a man breaking into an audio store - you couldn't justify an article on that. The Meme and event has wider implications, as noted - commentary on Russian Soldiers arguably conducting illegal activity in the Ukraine, and being ill-disciplined. Also, including as part of the reporting, the discussion of the sarcastic reporting of the event by the Wikipedia article. Certainly more importance to this than it being a standard news article on a break in. Broadly, in this case, I think there is value to keeping it. Deathlibrarian (talk) 03:57, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Funny video posted on twitter" is routine clickbait reporting. But, in any case, let's go through how the sources cover this, in the order of sources currently in the article:
  1. The South China Morning Post piece does not mention the incident;
  2. The Jerusalem Post piece does not mention the incident.
  3. The Newsweek piece does not mention the incident.
  4. The iNews piece does not mention the incident.
  5. The piece in The Independent does not mention the incident.
  6. The piece in The Guardian does not mention the incident.
  7. The Perth News piece frames it as a funny video, but does not state that the incident or resulting meme was in any way symbolic or important.
  8. The News Corp. Australia piece frames it as a funny video, but does not state that the incident or resulting meme was in any way symbolic or important.
  9. The piece in The Canberra Times does not mention the incident.
  10. The Herald Sun piece is the same exact piece as the News Corp Australia piece.
  11. The HITC piece frames it as a funny video that inspired reactions, but does not state that the incident or resulting meme was in any way symbolic or important.
  12. The Info (Slovakia) piece frames it as a viral video, but does not state that the incident or resulting meme was in any way symbolic or important.
In other words, the only reason we'd have for keeping it is WP:OR/WP:SYNTH—we'd be supposing without references to reliable sources that the video and/or resulting meme is notably symbolic or important in some other way. There's no evidence of wider implications that I can find reliable sources writing about, so I really don't see a reason to keep. — Mhawk10 (talk) 04:15, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Redirect per what Mhawk10 said. Noting: I previously tried a G3 speedy delete on the article, which was denied and I redirected the article twice to Battle of Kherson with both being reverted. Elijahandskip (talk) 04:21, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    In fairness, I'm pretty sure the reversions for you edits were for other unrelated but valid reasons. First off you thought it was a hoax, which it wasn't. Then you seemed to take issue with it being portrayed as an actual battle... when it was only using the term figuratively, the article is not implying that it was an actual battle. The article is simply using the meme name "Battle of Techno House 2022" coined by others. So there was good reason for the reversions for your redirections. Otherwise, I'll stop commenting on this article now - I'm getting close to WP:bludgeon, and I'll leave it to others to contribute.Thanks all. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article might be also the case of WP:TOOSOON sadly. 180.194.127.148 (talk) 06:39, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Recent, trivial viral moment. No indication of sustaining coverage. If reliable sources are talking about it in 5 years then it deserves an article, otherwise Wikipedia is what's immortalizing the moment, not reliable sources.Slywriter (talk) 14:19, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Largo. Insufficient sustained coverage (=actual coverage, not pretend coverage) to warrant a standalone article, or, for that matter, a redirect. SN54129 17:04, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Because this is fucking hilarious and also put in an infobox. Cganuelas (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete If it is just a viral meme with no obvious notably, it fails WP:GNG. I mean it is nowhere near the notability of Doge or Pepe the Frog. Felicia (talk) 23:24, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: While it is difficult to gauge the lasting impact of this meme, the current state of the article suggests that future coverage of this meme will be few and far in between (if at all), so WP:RECENTISM applies here. JaventheAldericky (talk) 23:25, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Redirect to Wikipedia_in_culture as WP:NOTPAPER and a standalone page makes the more sense than a merge to the battle. There's two elements of notability here: the coverage of the original meme and the coverage of the parody Wikipedia page with the infobox. Is there Wikipedia article/list about WP articles mentioned in media sources and then were deleted (and the article's deletion was mentioned as well in the news)? I'd support a merge to that page, if one exists, but if Wikipedia itself is being reported on with regards to a given subject (and we're being parodied), deleting the subject article is not a good look. BBQboffin (talk) 01:07, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As creator of the article, please note I have changed my vote to delete. I can see that coverage of the meme at this point is not being WP:SUSTAINED, and has been noted WP:RECENTISM applies. The coverage of the Wikipedia article was interesting, however. I think Merge is not an option - the Battle for Kherson page (where this event occurred) is not appropriate, and there isn't presently any other page for it to go to. I do agree with BBQboffin, that Wikipedia editors deleting articles that parody/joke about Wikipedia is not the best look and something to be considered here. Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:49, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As the article discusses the Wikipedia article, and four articles include screenshots of the wiki article and the meme title itself "Battle of Techno House 2022" is a parody of Wikipedia article titles - the meme seems overall be a bit of a parody of Wikipedia articles. I have added a short note to the Wikipedia_in_culture page with RS from this article in support. I think this clears us from any accusations of removing content that could be seen as critical of Wikipedia, a concern raised by some editors (including myself) here. Thanks all.Deathlibrarian (talk) 02:09, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move IMHO, this article clearly does not belong as an article on Wikipedia, yet it has some qualities. I propose the whole article is moved without redirects to eg. User:Deathlibrarian/Battle of Techno House 2022. That way the edit history is kept, while not showing up in the main article space. BFG (talk) 10:17, 6 March 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Battle_of_Techno_House_2022&oldid=1076670077"