Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Front End Friday

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. Consensus that adequate sourcing is not to be found. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Front End Friday (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No indication of notability. Reddit and Instagram are not reliable sources. The article was deprodded by its creator Elandres. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:50, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I said <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Front_End_Friday>: I understand issues with the articles notability and references. However, before it is removed I would like to add its redeemable content to an appropriate article. I would appreciate recommendations of that and any other advice on how to amend said article. Anecdotally, I actually stumbled upon the expression "Front End Friday" when posting #fef on Twitter referring to the Ecuador's national football team (Federación Ecuatoriana de Fútbol). However, after checking its use among others, I was surprised to see that the entirety of its users were auto enthusiasts with my now new understanding of its use. I'm probably not the first to realize this, but the first to want to document this in a space that people trust, so as to prevent any confusion. Having a top-listed article for "#fef" searches, is preferable to me than the more inquisitive, brute force method I had to employ. Arguably, a better space for this would be Urban Dictionary, and I understand if its not wanted here.Elandres (talk) 01:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the above, when I first considered how to format the content of the article, I referred to the Throw Back Thursday article. Looking back it now, it is a very simple page (similar to the one I wrote) with very succinct set of facts. The only major difference is that the #tbt page does have a reference (a Sports Illustrated article). This difference is a consequence of #tbt usage being more widespread than #fef, and thus garnered enough recognition to have a journalist cover the phenomenon (for lack of a better term). But that does not detract from widespread use of #fef and its most popular meaning. So I did a little extra research to see if its being written about, but its not. The best I could come up with is the original Reddit thread I found. I understand that is not reliable enough, and still support the idea of relocating the content.Elandres (talk) 01:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I can't find any sources to demonstrate notability. The article itself cites Instagram and Reddit. About the most reliable thing I can find on Google is an Urban Dictionary entry. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:52, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Sure there are mentions on social media, but there aren't any actual articles from reliable sources to show this is a thing. Elaenia (talk) 06:53, 9 March 2016 (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.