Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greatest Freak Out Ever (2nd nomination)

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. No evidence of notability under WP:GNG j⚛e decker ^talk 06:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Freak Out Ever

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

The article's conspicuous lack of sources appear to contradict its wild claims of viral video notability. And Adoil Descended (talk) 22:06, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete we AFDed this back in 2010, and it doesn't appear to have picked up any additional notability since then. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of notability. Youtube is not a reliable source. --Artene50 (talk) 02:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per previous nomination. It wasn't and still isn't notable. Till 07:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Reluctant) delete: I initially thought there might be some hope for this article, but this didn't survive AfD then, and it won't survive it now. Google Books hits are a few sentences at most, Google News archives hits are also brief and do not give any analysis. While this video is well-known among viral video fans, it seems that only the most viral of videos receive that kind of attention that warrants an article (Charlie Bit My Finger is probably the best example). Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 15:35, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 16:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Verifiability, not truth - Mailer Diablo 10:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No notable (and probably unencyclopedic). Does not meet the General Guideline and has no reliable sources supporting it (and surely won't have). —Hahc 21 15:34, 8 July 2012 (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.