Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Poop

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. ✗plicit 13:55, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Poop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOTNEWS. Typical "amusing" or "human interest" story which gets some attention for a very short while (in this case, some days in July 2019) but has no lasting notability. Fram (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a very clear failure of our not news guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete minimal sources found and not meeting guidelines as above. Oaktree b (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 6 Trusted sources, written like a Wikipedia article, not a news article, article has no bias, & not just a "human interest" story, if that was the case, all Wikipedia articles about criminals would be "human interest" stories . Silent-Rains (talk) 15:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 99.99999...% of criminals do not have Wikipedia pages. Only the ones which receive an abnormally high amount of coverage or coverage over a long period of time get pages. Articles on crimes usually can't survive deletion based on WP:GNG alone; they also need to meet the stricter requirements of WP:NEVENT. Mlb96 (talk) 21:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Multiple independent sources, seems to meet GNG. CT55555 (talk) 20:55, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A search for うんこマン on google.co.jp doesn't get me any hits connected to the subject outside of the three-day period following a mention on Tokudane! This suggests to me that he fails WP:NEVENT, as there was no lasting coverage. It was just an interesting news story which came and went. Mlb96 (talk) 21:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • You ddin't find many results because this happened in Japan. In Japan, this received months of media attention, it even got media coverage on tv stations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silent-Rains (talk • contribs) 22:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Did you read my post? I searched on google.co.jp, which is Japanese Google, so any mentions in Japanese media should have appeared. If it truly got as much coverage as you say it did, then link some. Mlb96 (talk) 02:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per NOTNEWS and WP:SUSTAINED. Avilich (talk) 17:08, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as not encyclopedic and gross.Fulmard (talk) 05:59, 11 February 2022 (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.