Talk:Bitch Lasagna

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 October 2018. The result of the discussion was redirect.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

YouTube Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject YouTube, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of YouTube and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YouTubeWikipedia:WikiProject YouTubeTemplate:WikiProject YouTubeYouTube articles

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject YouTube To-do:

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see list.
Assess : Apply the assessment scale on Unknown-importance YouTube articles + Unassessed YouTube articles
Cleanup : See cleanup listing
Maintain : This WikiProject
Stubs : Category:Stub-Class YouTube articles
Other :
- Substitute {{WikiProject YouTube/Invite Members}} on user talk pages
- Check out edit requests on Talk:List of YouTubers

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Internet culture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

November 2019 page recreation

For context, this page's history:

October 2018 release was deleted for being a poorly created article and for failing notabiility.
December 2018 recreation attempt was opposed for failing to demonstrate notability for a song (WP:NSONG)
April 2019 recreation attempt was opposed for being a poorly created article

I am recreating this page because I believe these issues have been addressed. I believe this song's notability has changed since the first few weeks immediately following its release (when the first article failed to demonstrate notability). I believe a standalone article is appropriate because there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article. I believe this new page is a sufficiently-sourced article to demonstrate WP:N and WP:NSONG via WP:GNG.

I've added some context to how I arrived at this decision below. I welcome discussion of any/all of the above and below points! —Shrinkydinks (talk) 07:11, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Previous article criticism

Elaborating on why this page should be re-created: An outline of previous issues with the article that led to deletion, and point-by-point addresses of these concerns:

The October 2018 article attempt:

"The article is extremely short and largely unsourced"
"not enough (or any found as of writing this) third party reliable sources that discuss it in significant detail (fails WP:GNG)"
"The song is already mentioned under PewDiePie#Discography"
- Addressed: Expanded article by elaborating on more significant coverage since this AfD discussion. Provided sufficient detail to merit a standalone article by going beyond stub-class depth.

The December 2018 article attempt:

"There is no indication of notability per WP:NSONG. The "kotaku" and "variety" references only briefly mention the song and the "dexerto" reference may not a reliable source."
- Addressed with higher quality sources, some of which directly discuss the song, and others of which comprise more significant coverage of the song since this discussion a year ago.

The April 2019 article attempt:

Recreation was objected to because "the sources you have cited fail to establish notability"
- Addressed with higher quality/more sources.

Context from March 2019:

Two months after "Bitch Lasagna"'s original deletion, the broader topic "PewDiePie vs T-Series" was created. It was speedy-kept in an AfD in March 2019.

Quality sources

Elaborating on why this page should be re-created: I believe there are sufficient quality sources on this topic, which support an article of sufficient depth, to merit a standalone page (covering relevant material that could not be condensed into a stub). These sources include

which are all approved on Wikipedia's list of discussed reliable sources. Other reliable sources included in the context section of this article include:

I believe these sources together comprise notability via WP:GNG.

—Shrinkydinks (talk) 07:13, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sources of middling quality

There are some sources of middling quality in this article. I have included the few of them that there are in the article as a start because I believe they are of high enough quality (defended below). That said, I believe the article could benefit from replacing these sources with ones of higher quality.

Know Your Meme — there is no consensus on their "confirmed" entries. To the extent that there are 1000s of articles covering online meme-specific content, and in this case the reference is only used to discuss online meme-specific content and that content's inclusion relevantly benefits the overall article, I believe its minimal inclusion is merited. —Shrinkydinks (talk) 07:01, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Good article. I've reviewed your comments on the talk page and I have to say I agree with you. Cheers..

Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 21:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Willbb234: Thank you! I was a bit nervous about WP:BOLDly opening an article that had previously been AfD'd. Hope I did the topic justice with my article start and that the community agrees it was the right call, based on the outlined reasons (or others they'd like to add). —Shrinkydinks (talk) 22:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"B**** Lasagna" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect B**** Lasagna. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 17:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]