Talk:An Open Letter to Honey Singh
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the An Open Letter to Honey Singh article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | A fact from An Open Letter to Honey Singh appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 January 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Tags regarding notability
editThe fact that the video received 16 lakh hits makes it notable.[1] gives it stand alone notability as also extensive independent coverage in numerous independent secondary reliable sources. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:32, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Policy for number of hits being a qualifier for notability? This was a single event, on a single day. We need to find enduring mention, not the usual Indian media hyped-up rubbish. Regarding journalists, gnats and attention spans sometimes comes to mind. (Some say goldfish.) - Sitush (talk) 05:43, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- (1) wp:EVENT is a strawman argument, the notability isn't just because of the national and international coverage. (2) Instead of ranting about them, please demonstrate how sources aren't reliable in the context of this article. (3) The notability is due to the video going viral, as described in multiple, reliable, independent sources both Indian and international. (4) As I see there is a category "Viral videos", if anyone claims 16 lakh isn't viral enough in the context of Wikipedia, they may kindly provide relevant policy. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 01:42, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- You have not answered my question. Where is the policy that says number of hits of a single event equates to notability? That is what you claimed. This is not about reliability of sources, so you are the one bringing irrelevancies into this. As you know from past meetings, I'm far better than you at arguing a position, so you might want to drop the deflection - it won't work.
- (1) wp:EVENT is a strawman argument, the notability isn't just because of the national and international coverage. (2) Instead of ranting about them, please demonstrate how sources aren't reliable in the context of this article. (3) The notability is due to the video going viral, as described in multiple, reliable, independent sources both Indian and international. (4) As I see there is a category "Viral videos", if anyone claims 16 lakh isn't viral enough in the context of Wikipedia, they may kindly provide relevant policy. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 01:42, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Meanwhile, I will check out the viral video category that you mentioned and see just how much other crap we have. My suspicion is that many of the articles in that category will have had mentions for much more than one day. Eg: some cute advertisements go viral for ages. - Sitush (talk) 06:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- There is no comparison with Keyboard Cat, for starters. That was truly viral. - Sitush (talk) 06:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
{od} Not one day.
- 3 February[6]
- 6 February[9]
- 23 March[10]
Repeating one more time, it is a viral video because RS such as BBC call it a viral video. Also this page is to improve Wikipedia content in general and the subject content in particular, not a place to pass personal comments about editors. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:56, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
- I would say it has WP:SIGCOV from multiple WP:RS. It is a large Single event that has lasting effect, and on that score there is a question whethher it passes WP:GNG. But on balance, I think its notable enough. That's my opinion. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:02, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Context
editYogesh Khandke your additions should solve the length problem for the DYK. This article could benefit from more context for the benefit of our non-Indian readers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:22, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- May be more about Honey Singh? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:31, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Attribution
editI have copied a few sentences from this article to Honey Singh's (diff). --Skr15081997 (talk) 09:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Can someone mark this article for deletion? Wikipedia can not have articles for everything that goes viral! 103.199.120.4 (talk) 06:11, 14 October 2016 (UTC)