The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was not funny. (NAC) Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:07, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability[edit]

This article on Wikipedia's notability requirements does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements as established by WP:GNG, the article I am currently nominating for deletion. As such, the article in question should be deleted, SALTed and BJAODNed.Spirit of Eagle (talk) 00:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment What is this "article on Wikipedia's notability requirements" of which you speak? I have been promised an inheritence which I wish to invest. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Wikipedia. Can be covered there as it is part of the notable encyclopedia. Dough4872 01:38, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree with Dough4872's merge proposal; how has this non-notable page existed for so long?! -Newyorkadam (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]
• Comment I've moved this from Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/2nd to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Notability (2nd nomination) because someone didn't know about Template:Mfdx for subsequent nominations (see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#How to list pages for deletion). Anon126 (talk - contribs) 01:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, fails WP:N… DIVIDE BY ZERO OH SHI—Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Amazing: this article fails itself! It hasn't been covered in reliable sources. I don't recall seeing any independent coverage for Wikipedia's notability guidelines, therefore, it isn't notable. 02:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
• Strongest Possible Delete. I want a page in Wikipedia for myself and this damn notability thing seems to be the only thing (besides lack of RS) that prevents me from basking in the glory of self-flattery. It would do my ego good to get a page. Freedom from Notability Requirements is my rallying cry! 4.5 million articles in WP is not enough. With no N requirement, we could have 4.5 billion (or perhaps 45 billion) articles. One for each person on earth. Join the revolution and vote DELETE! – S. Rich (talk) 02:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete create better jokes :P Secret ^account 02:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete what's notable about what's notable? This does nothing but makes everyone's life miserable. It cuases ppl to cry. Why ndid we wait this long to figure out? YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 02:48, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment This page has received at least a mention in the press, here, here, and here. Does this rise to the level of WP:SIGCOV? That's a tough call. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:03, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per this is a selling point in arguments against using Wikipedia. See the Professor Wikipedia video,^{[citation needed]} in which a girl disappears because she is not notable. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  So that's what happened to my no-name ex-girlfriend! davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - all material in this page can be covered in other articles. 149.254.183.195 (talk) 08:16, 1 April 2014 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.