Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shoe on head

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 of the debate was Speedily deleted --Cyde↔Weys 03:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Must Keep. This fad has mobilized more YTMNDers than any other, it has taken on a life of its own and is no longer relegated to the confines of YTMND. Not just a simple YTMND meme, it is almost a way of life. The naysayers are being more vocal because the people who understand it are too busy participating.
  • Must Post to bottom of AfD! - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable meme. --Chris (talk) 02:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. We need a CSD for this kind of ridiculous stuff. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 02:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom. —C.Fred (talk) 02:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete - it should just be speedied. Fabricationary 02:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unfortunate that there are people who actually think this was worth creating. Fan1967 02:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. --Alex S 02:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Aren't most notable fads generally more than 24 hours old? (A heads-up: The AfD and speedy deletion templates have been removed repeatedly.) emk 02:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Aren't most notable fads notable? RockinRob^Talk 02:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom. Ridiculous. ^Triana_C 02:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete WP is not for things made up on the Internet in one day. NawlinWiki 02:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Exactly Jimbo Wales created the internet in six days, therefore that is the minimum threshold for notability--64.12.117.11 02:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Sarcasm is not a pretty thing. :p ^Triana_C 02:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Must Keep.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.171.81.102 (talk • contribs)
• Must Keep. This YTMND fad brought all YTMND'ers together. It really gave people a sense of comradery. Please do not delete.— Preceding unsigned comment added by N1CK70 (talk • contribs)
• Must Keep. This YTMND fad brought all YTMND'ers together. It really gave people a sense of comradery. Please do not delete.I would just like to quote .. "naysayers are being more vocal because the people who understand it are too busy participating." so true. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE: people who are suggesting deletion also suggest deletion of OTHER YTMND.com wiki's. Just because it happened on the internet doesnt mean it isnt history, okay? And a reply to "Aren't most notable fads more than 24 hours old?" No. This one became so instantly popular it was notable within just a few hours of it's creation. N1CK70
• Delete. I understand that this is a very emotional issue for YTMND'ers everywhere, but I have to vote with my brain instead of my heart, and my brain is a deletionist. Superbeatles 03:50, 22 June 2006 (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.

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 of the debate was Speedy Delete by Kungfuadam. Yanksox ^(talk) 02:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Previously speedy deleted page recreated (as above). Deserves a reference in the main YTMND article at the very most. Matticus78 23:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Very Strong Delete. Doesn't qualify for G4, unfortunately, but I think this sort of thing ought to. Tevildo 23:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Protect from recreation. The article's been deleted again. --Coredesat 00:48, 26 June 2006 (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.