Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/HA! HA! guy - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Darobsta (talk | contribs) at 11:31, 20 July 2005 (vote). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 11:31, 20 July 2005 by Darobsta (talk | contribs) (vote)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

HA! HA! guy

This page was created after its first incarnation Ha ha guy was nominated for deletion (see Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Ha ha guy). As most of the delete votes in that initial discussion are proposing that the article is un-noteworthy I feel it right that this clone of the original article is also proposed for deletion. My vote is delete. Francs2000 | Talk File:Uk flag large.png 22:58, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete this one has pictures, but is still about an unencyclopedic topic; just some stuff that happened on a forum. Really, it shouldn't be necessary to do a second VFD, because this was a duplicate article, but here we are. CDC (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - This is not a "clone" of the article. It gives a history and everything. I didn't know it began on the SomethingAwful forums. I wouldn't know that if it was deleted. Also see here. Also, they were created by two different people. From Misplaced Pages:Deletion policy: "If an article is repeatedly re-created by unassociated editors after being deleted, this should be seen as evidence for the need for an article." --pile0nades 23:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete -- I now feel confident both articles should be handled the same way -- if this phenomena of cliche pictures is encyclopedic, then write about that in an appropriately titled article, but this seems to just be a non-notable intricacy of the barely notable forum site Fark.com which is something that should not expand into a whole article on its own, because people just would not look for something like this in an ecyclopedia. (See also, my notes on Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Ha ha guy). --Mysidia 23:51, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - Kill this when you kill All your base are belong to us. Not every meme deserve to live, but this one seems to have grown enough that it might qualify. - Chairboy 23:53, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep An Internet phenomenon or meme is encyclopedic. Quoting Misplaced Pages policy on importance: "An article is important and deserving of inclusion in Misplaced Pages if any one of the following holds true: 1. there is clear proof that a reasonable number of people (eg. more than 500 people worldwide) are or were concurrently interested in the subject." There are clearly more than 500 people interested! () ArcTheLad 23:55, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. We're discussing this because a related VfD is in play (Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Ha ha guy). IMO the related VfD should result in a redirect, and this should be kept, because this article is already encyclopedic and interesting, and because of the likelihood this will be an even more encyclopedic article. After all, we've VfDd and kept an article about a woman who's only encyclopedic accomplishment in life was to climb mt everest in a skirt and wrote a book about it. Quaker guy has more mileage, ISTM. Flawiki 00:05, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Frances is a douchebag. Then again, so are Drew Curtis and Jeff, the two head honchos behind fark.com, so it's not like fark users aren't used to that sort of thing. Anyway, as I've said before -- when we use fark, we try to forget about its many, many flaws (such as the unfair deletions, paying to be linked on the main page, the superiority complexes of TotalFarkers, etc.). Some of what helps us forget are the funny cliches and articles that appear. The "Ha Ha" guy is one of those cliches. I mean, shit, it's almost like someone has to die of cancer and the article linked to the main page for the admins and moderators -- as well as Fark posters both lite and TF -- to not be douchebags. When you attack the items used from the site, you attack its users as well. Most think its funny, and most think it is relevant. If you are going to delete it, and I don't think you should, then at least link the stupid thing to fark.com which you SHOULD have done in the first place. Which makes me think, if you are going to link it to fark.com, and have it listed as being relevant to the site, wouldn't it need its own entry to explain WHY it's there in the first place? Granted, Admiral Ackbar is listed due to Star Wars. But he has additional significance as it relates to Fark.com. It's really a fine line here, but why make such a big deal out of it? When it comes down to it, it's just an image, and you guys at Misplaced Pages aren't exactly the most superior life forms on the Internet, either. Nobody is really going to notice this after it calms down, and now that it's one day later after one of the Fark admins went off his ritalin and all but demanded that Fark posters who liked the image stopped using it, things ARE beginning to calm down a bit. At least, that's the way it seems to me. --68.158.111.157 01:09, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete and protect against recreation fork to avoid VfD. -Splash 01:16, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Putting lipstick on a pig doesn't mean it'll win the Miss America contest, and prettying up the Ha ha guy article doesn't make it any more encyclopedic. --Calton | Talk 01:24, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • HA! HA! I'm using the delete button! Note to article creator: this meme is popular on imageboards too. humblefool®Have you voted in the CSD poll yet? 02:34, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. This article indeed seems to be much more informative than the original "Ha Ha Guy" article. I have done a lot of reading on what does and does not constitute a valid Misplaced Pages article. Everything I have read so far suggests that the article is completely legit. These internet memes are fascinating and I see no reason whatever to remove them. There are no space constraints - as previously mentioned, this is not a paper encyclopedia! Furthermore, the arrogance of those that seek to remove the page is disgusting to me. If the article is not "noteworthy" to you, simply don't read about it. I find lots of stuff in the Chinese language Misplaced Pages to be "not noteworthy", yet I am not parading around trying to remove the content. I think Misplaced Pages was built for articles like this in mind. --Digizen 02:47, 19 July 2005 (UTC)