Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fat Chicks in Party Hats

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —Xezbeth 18:06, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)

Fat Chicks in Party Hats[edit]

Webcruft, alexa rank 144 080, un-encyclopedic, delete--nixie 02:08, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

NN, and just plain silly. delete BigFatDave 02:37, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, not notable, website promo. Megan1967 03:33, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Promo by whom? The website hasn't been updated for years. --Aranae 04:57, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
  - The entire article discusses the website, whether it be updated or not the language of it is what I would regard as "promotional". Megan1967 07:24, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Merge with Seanbaby. It shouldn't be a seperate article not that notable but it is popular with the video game fans community. --Anonymous Cow 03:35, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep Notable humor site. If the link to Seanbaby can be confirmed, then merge. Klonimus 07:24, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, the same phone number is the whois contact for this site and seanbaby.com. Merge. Samaritan 16:07, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Strong Keep This website had quite a following, spawned imitators, and was written up in a few major media outlets. It also led to a number of discussions about intellectual property on the web, the security of posting personal photos publicly, and the legal responsibility of hosting companies for content on their servers. It's as noteworthy as just about anything else in Category:Comedy websites except for the huge sites like the onion. This site was big and still has some followers. Why don't we delete every article about TV shows that only lasted a few years while we're at it? What's more noteworthy than large following, historical significance, discussion spawning, and recognized by big media? --Aranae 04:57, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
KeeptodayKeeptomorrowKeepforever!!! This young man shall be Prime Minister of Mexico one day. Axeattack 05:01, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Mexico doesn't have a Prime Minister. This is a new User whose first edits were today. Rick K 06:39, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
Delete un-encyclopedic. Vegaswikian 05:46, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Lupin 06:16, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, nn. Rick K 06:39, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Not notable. How come I find myself suddenly agreeing with RickK on VfD-issues? Sjakkalle 09:23, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Merge or keep once-notable humor site. Kappa 12:20, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I just updated the site in hopes of convincing people to switch their votes to keep. --Aranae 18:11, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. -Sean Curtin 23:18, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
Delete, not notable. Mikkalai 01:47, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Notorious website. The "Reviews and references" provides more than enough evidence of notability. Gamaliel 06:45, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep--pretty good article, and the mentions in major media and such push it over the bar for me. Meelar (talk) 16:39, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
Keep anyone who wants this deleted is made of ham. ShadowyCabal
Keep, looks like notable. Grue 19:56, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep, seems somewhat notable to me. — flamingspinach | (talk) 01:45, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
Keep, but article can be improved jiy 08:38, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, NN. Lots of humor sites on the web anyway, and WP:WIN a web guide. R adiant _* 13:48, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
Strong Keep. Very notable site.--Badlydrawnjeff 20:14, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep. At one point, a pretty well-known humor site. Thunderbunny 22:42, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Not notable at all. Save the bandwith. Mcfly85 06:25, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Merge with and redirect to Seanbaby. DS 13:28, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.