This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Popular culture. It is one of many
deletion lists coordinated by
WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at
WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at
WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Popular culture|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few
scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Popular culture.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's
deletion policy and
WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
"Instagram Face" is something very abstract and unverifiable, ie. two reliable sources may define it differently. It may also be inherently derogatory, as it is based on negative opinions about women's appearances.
With Love from Cassie Schebel (
talk) 01:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This is something best discussed on the talk page.
Thriley (
talk) 01:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Why? Since these are reasons to delete the article entirely, I would think this is where it belongs. This is a genuine question, I've never nominated an article for deletion before, and I am probably doing at least two things wrong.
With Love from Cassie Schebel (
talk) 01:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Draft: Well the "Instagram face" is a thing,
[1] and
[2], but the wiki article seems to tell a different story. Should be sent back to draft to sort this out, topic seems notable.
Oaktree b (
talk) 01:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Draft, This is a topic I was able to find some sources on, so it's optimal for this to stay in draftspace until its ready for main space. -
Samoht27 (
talk) 18:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)reply
It definitely is a topic.
[3][4] If it needs more depth or a rebalancing, I'm happy to take that on. I note that all the sources listed on this page are written by women.
Keep Plenty of coverage in solid outlets. There is no reason for this to go to draft space with the citations it currently has.
Thriley (
talk) 19:35, 22 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Draftify For clearing up the remaining issues.
ArvindPalaskar (
talk) 12:09, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
What are the issues that cannot be fixed through normal editing? If we send it to draft it risks being pruned after inactivity which would amount to backdoor deletion. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 18:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, divided between those editors arguing for Draftification and those advocating Keep as is. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, I've drafted a rewrite using 6 reliable sources including those mentioned in this discussion. It's now two paragraphs with a clear scope. The sources cover a span of about 6 years. I've used named references and welcome other editors to expand where appropriate, especially
Lfstevens. @
Oaktree b,
Samoht27, and
ArvindPalaskar: you all voted draftify, does it still seem too far off the mark or is this an acceptable start?
Rjjiii (
talk) 04:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks, this is enough to make this page a safe Keep. -
Samoht27 (
talk) 16:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep Seems properly verifiable and is now sourced fairly well; notable topic with interest from major publications.
WeirdNAnnoyed (
talk) 14:34, 28 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep I see the article has been improved since the nomination, which moots out the "draftify" into purgatory !votes. There are reliable sources sufficient to meet WP:GNG. As for the original nomination, i see the only valid ground of the nomination would have been whether the subject was "unverifiable," but it is.--Milowent • hasspoken 19:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)reply