Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PrankvsPrank

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) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PrankvsPrank

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

does not meet wp:notability. it seems more of an ad than a blp Fazbear7891 (talk) 04:34, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:39, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:39, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep [1] and [2] from the current reflist is holding the notability up rather well IMHO. Outside some paragraphs treading into WP:IINFO territory and sourcing to not-as-reliable sources, this looks to me just very underworked. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 15:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It seems to have considerable and acceptable coverage. SwisterTwister talk 04:56, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:43, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 (Talk) 12:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I agree with nominator that the article could be written in a less promotional manner, but - after getting past all the non-authoritative youtube, facebook and twitter pages - there appears to be sufficient online coverage to support notability.--Rpclod (talk) 12:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
comment clearly a poster child for the WP:SYSTEMICBIAS of Wikipedia to elevate trivia about white, Western, on-line drivel. While it seems to meet WP:GNG with the ABC and Huff Po articles, most of the other third party stuff is in relation to a more general Online prank culture which might suggest a rename and refocus to get to a more encyclopedic presentation. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Instead of going on about social injustices, this group have released a song that has charted in the top 60 of Britain's national music chart so with that and the other sources this "drivel" scrapes by. God forbid people have entertainment and the media report on it's cultural celebrities. GuzzyG (talk) 18:42, 5 July 2015 (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.