Misplaced Pages

Template:Did you know nominations/Ashton Kutcher on Twitter: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Template:Did you know nominations Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:32, 30 May 2012 editDrmies (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators407,819 edits no← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:38, 3 October 2022 edit undoCommonsDelinker (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors1,019,862 edits Replacing Ashton_Kutcher_by_David_Shankbone.jpg with File:Ashton_Kutcher_by_David_Shankbone_2010_NYC.jpg (by CommonsDelinker because: Duplicate: Exact or scaled-down duplicate: [[:c::File:Ashton Ku 
(39 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{#if:no|<noinclude>]<div style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
{{DYKsubpage
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify this page.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as ], ] or ]), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. '''No further edits should be made to this page'''.''
|monthyear=May 2012

|passed=<!--When closing discussion, enter yes or no-->
The result was '''the article was deleted at ]''' by {{user|Scottywong}}. ] (]) 19:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
|2=

}}
====Ashton Kutcher on Twitter==== ====Ashton Kutcher on Twitter====
{{DYK nompage links|nompage=Ashton Kutcher on Twitter|Ashton Kutcher on Twitter}} {{DYK nompage links|nompage=Ashton Kutcher on Twitter|Ashton Kutcher on Twitter}}
<div style="float:right;margin-left:0.5em;">
⚫ <!--
]
⚫ </div><!--


Please do not edit above this line unless you are a DYK volunteer who is closing the discussion. Please do not edit above this line unless you are a DYK volunteer who is closing the discussion.


--> -->
{{*mp}}... that ''']''' was the first ] account to reach one million followers? *... that ''']''' ''(Kutcher pictured)'' was the first ] account to reach one million followers?
<!-- <!--
--> -->
Line 20: Line 24:


:*Let's not have anymore of these unencyclopedic articles ("X on Twitter") on the front page. ] (]) 00:32, 30 May 2012 (UTC) :*Let's not have anymore of these unencyclopedic articles ("X on Twitter") on the front page. ] (]) 00:32, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
::*Feel free to ] it, but it is the future of WP.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 01:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
:::*You and your trivia are not the future of WP, Tony. I'm not going to AfD it, but I don't want this tripe on the front page. ] (]) 01:55, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
:::*If so, I weep for the future. <span style="font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;">]<span style="color:#0095c6;">of</span>]</span> 02:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
::::*Are you aware that both ] and ] have been on the main page?--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 02:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
:::::*Yes, and I find that to be a sad fact, not one to emulate. <span style="font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;">]<span style="color:#0095c6;">of</span>]</span> 04:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
::::::*You are making an ] argument. WP is suppose to summarize ] on subjects that they write about.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 04:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
:::::::*You're absolutely right that I don't like it. I certainly know better than to use that as a deletion argument. There are however relevant arguments which are perfectly valid: this is pure recentism, and I question its lasting significance. <span style="font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;">]<span style="color:#0095c6;">of</span>]</span> 04:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
::::::::*I will repeat what I said at ] here: "If you feel these articles should not exist, I am willing to wait a ] result. Awaiting an AFD outcome is a common thing at DYK. Furthermore, this is something we should resolve while there are only 5 of these types of articles. If we don't want them stop this now. Please AFD them and get this settled." (see ])--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 05:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
{{od}}I also don't like this. Something should be done about these articles. Tony is right, this is a good time to discuss this. <small>(I am hoping none of the Bollywood fan's should get this idea. They won't even use Reliable Sources in this type of article.)</small> §§] (]) 14:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
*Like I said above, someone should open an AFD on ], while we can still nip this in the bud. There are only 5 accounts right now. If people don't like this lets go handle it in the proper forum. Here we are suppose to analyze ]. We have a separate place where AFD discussions are suppose to occur. P.S. I just created Kutcher and Obama assuming these were wanted article types after seeing Gaga and Bieber made the main page. I am open to a consideration on whether this page type should exist.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 15:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
**Making a discussion in five different talk pages is not correct. We should have one unified discussion at AFD. I am going to take down you malplaced merger discussions on individual pages.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 18:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
***I have closed discussion at ] and removed merge tags at ], ] and ]. I am also watching ] and ]. There should be one discussion at ] on deleting, redirecting, merging or keeping these articles.
:::*Let it be stated for the record that the consensus at ANI is that it was improper for you to close those discussions. <span style="font-family:Lucida Calligraphy;">]<span style="color:#0095c6;">of</span>]</span> 03:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
{{od}}Sigh I'm going to wade in... I usually argue WP should be about
Cézanne and Niobium, with most anything BLP avoided. However, in this case "his" twitter acct has made a lot of news: CNN, Wired, NPR and the NYT. I hate this topic, but it isn't exactly un-notable. I'd rather hear review of the CONTENT of this article. If sources and writing are good enuf (which granted it might not be) then keep the damn thing. Saying it's the "future" of WP is of course totally ridiculous (shame on you Tony), but rejecting it cuz the topic isn't "snooty" enough isn't good either. OK now I'm off to take a shower.-- ]&nbsp;<span style="font-weight:bold;"></span>&#32;(]) 06:20, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
*('''ALT1''')... that when ''']''' was the most followed ] account in the world, ] ''(pictured)'' served as a diplomat for the United States?--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 05:40, 3 June 2012 (UTC)



] Updating to say: Article has been nominated for AFD. This now needs to survive an AfD. If that happens, is it ready to be moved to the prep area? --] (]) 23:37, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
:I don't know why this was was relisted at 9 keeps and 4 deletes. Subsequent responses are 6 keeps and 5 deletes. This is either going to be kept or NCed.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 02:51, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
::I have to agree with Drmies, this is really trivial. There's lots more important stuff to both write about and put on the main page. <b style="font-family:'Tempus Sans ITC'"> — ] • ] •</b> 20:44, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
:::Obviously, many people agree with you. This has been at AFD for over 2 weeks and with over 25 respondents, nearly 40% want the article deleted. However, what about the opinions of the more than 60%?--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 20:52, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


There has been a discussion regarding fair use for the screencaps used in these articles and weather or not they qualify. ] makes it seem unlikely they do. If the screencaps are in the article, this issue needs to be addressed to be sure they actually qualify under Misplaced Pages's Fair Use policy. --] (]) 12:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
:You have yet to make a cogent argument there as to why a picture of his moptop is preferable to a picture of his tweets in that debate.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 12:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
::Furthermore the Bieber Twitter account has a copyrightable avatar making his page un-FUR-able.--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 16:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
*This has been listed for a month and it's still not properly proofread. ] (]) 21:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
**All these WP:POPSTAR on Twitter articles are just WP:POPCRAP and a sad sign of the state of wiki] ] 02:14, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
{{#if:no|</div></noinclude>|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template talk:Did you know/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|]|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template:Did you know nominations/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|]}}}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Latest revision as of 19:38, 3 October 2022

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was the article was deleted at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ashton Kutcher on Twitter by Scottywong (talk · contribs). Cunard (talk) 19:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Ashton Kutcher on Twitter

( )

Ashton Kutcher

Created/expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nom at 23:26, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Let's not have anymore of these unencyclopedic articles ("X on Twitter") on the front page. Drmies (talk) 00:32, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • You and your trivia are not the future of WP, Tony. I'm not going to AfD it, but I don't want this tripe on the front page. Drmies (talk) 01:55, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • If so, I weep for the future. LadyofShalott 02:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, and I find that to be a sad fact, not one to emulate. LadyofShalott 04:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • You're absolutely right that I don't like it. I certainly know better than to use that as a deletion argument. There are however relevant arguments which are perfectly valid: this is pure recentism, and I question its lasting significance. LadyofShalott 04:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
I also don't like this. Something should be done about these articles. Tony is right, this is a good time to discuss this. (I am hoping none of the Bollywood fan's should get this idea. They won't even use Reliable Sources in this type of article.) §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Let it be stated for the record that the consensus at ANI is that it was improper for you to close those discussions. LadyofShalott 03:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Sigh I'm going to wade in... I usually argue WP should be about

Cézanne and Niobium, with most anything BLP avoided. However, in this case "his" twitter acct has made a lot of news: CNN, Wired, NPR and the NYT. I hate this topic, but it isn't exactly un-notable. I'd rather hear review of the CONTENT of this article. If sources and writing are good enuf (which granted it might not be) then keep the damn thing. Saying it's the "future" of WP is of course totally ridiculous (shame on you Tony), but rejecting it cuz the topic isn't "snooty" enough isn't good either. OK now I'm off to take a shower.-- Ultracobalt  (talk) 06:20, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


Updating to say: Article has been nominated for AFD. This now needs to survive an AfD. If that happens, is it ready to be moved to the prep area? --LauraHale (talk) 23:37, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't know why this was was relisted at 9 keeps and 4 deletes. Subsequent responses are 6 keeps and 5 deletes. This is either going to be kept or NCed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:51, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I have to agree with Drmies, this is really trivial. There's lots more important stuff to both write about and put on the main page. — Puppy of Dog The Teddy Bear • • 20:44, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Obviously, many people agree with you. This has been at AFD for over 2 weeks and with over 25 respondents, nearly 40% want the article deleted. However, what about the opinions of the more than 60%?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:52, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

There has been a discussion regarding fair use for the screencaps used in these articles and weather or not they qualify. Misplaced Pages:Non-free content review#File:@justinbieber screenshot cropped.jpg makes it seem unlikely they do. If the screencaps are in the article, this issue needs to be addressed to be sure they actually qualify under Misplaced Pages's Fair Use policy. --LauraHale (talk) 12:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

You have yet to make a cogent argument there as to why a picture of his moptop is preferable to a picture of his tweets in that debate.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Furthermore the Bieber Twitter account has a copyrightable avatar making his page un-FUR-able.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
  • This has been listed for a month and it's still not properly proofread. Drmies (talk) 21:50, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
    • All these WP:POPSTAR on Twitter articles are just WP:POPCRAP and a sad sign of the state of wikiPumpkinSky talk 02:14, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Category:
Template:Did you know nominations/Ashton Kutcher on Twitter: Difference between revisions Add topic