Subjective importance is when a subject is perceived as being notable by seeming important or appearing to stand out to a person or group of people. A...

popular YouTube channel does not make the subject automatically notable. WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a reason. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)...

since it was written back. Kept after a 2005 AfD that featured mostly WP:ITSPOPULAR-style arguments. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:26, 22 November 2015 (UTC) Keep. I've...

reliable sources. A magazine can exist (WP:ITEXISTS) and be popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR) but neither are in themselves reasons to keep an article. They do make...

2016 (UTC) I have to disagree, @BU Rob13:, to me that seems like a WP:ITSPOPULAR-reading of WP:ENT. Narvaez, Jr.'s popularity still needs to be proven...

07:31, 11 March 2020 (UTC) >>BEANS X2t 15:53, 11 March 2020 (UTC) That WP:ITSPOPULAR and WP:LOOKSGOOD is not a reason to keep an article, BEANS X2. soetermans...

respects" in a certain field, this essentially falls under the argument of WP:ITSPOPULAR mixed in with WP:ITSUSEFUL. It's still expected that a book will gain...

it to actually be notable.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 11:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)...

clear on what can establish something as notable: reliable sources.WP:ITSPOPULAR arguments are not sufficient. λ NegativeMP1 17:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)...

Maile (talk) 23:03, 13 June 2023 (UTC) That vote rationale sounds like WP:ITSPOPULAR mixed with WP:ILIKEIT Dronebogus (talk) 08:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC) The...

on YouTube, but popularity does not mean that someone is notable. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) It may make it more likely that someone will gain coverage, but it's...

would still require coverage in reliable sources to show notability. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) There are actually a lot of YouTube and podcast shows/personalities that...

YouTube - and being popular on YouTube counts for little on Wikipedia. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) If it was that easy to gain notability on Wikipedia that way, we'd have...

(UTC) What press coverage? (The other two reasons are irrelevant; WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a notability rationale if you can't back it up with sources.) –Roscelese...

Waxworker (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC) Comment Be mindful of WP:ITSPOPULAR, understand what you mean but notability-type arguments not based on policy...

WP:NCORP. While it survived its previous AfD it was on the basis of WP:ITSPOPULAR / WP:IKNOWIT / WP:Clearly notable. The NCORP criteria have been tightened...

February 2018 (UTC) Widely perhaps, but not in any reliable sources. See WP:ITSPOPULAR.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 00:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

popularity itself doesn't give notability, it just makes it more likely per WP:ITSPOPULAR. The article states that clips from their channel have been shown on various...

any policy based reason for keeping the article. They all seem to be WP:ITSPOPULAR arguments phrased in different ways. The article does say that "Dungeons...

of attendees does not really matter as far as notability goes, as WP:ITSPOPULAR holds no weight unless the popularity of the convention is covered in...

and deleted, for a lack of reliable sources; while it's true that WP:ITSPOPULAR and WP:ITSUSEFUL are arguments to avoid, the fact that these are things...

essentially) isn't something that automatically makes something notable. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Now having a large fandom can sometimes make someone qualify, but that...

in the blogosphere, but being popular just isn't enough on here. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:07, 31 December 2014 (UTC) The above discussion...

concerned that a lot of the article tends to focus on online popularity. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Being popular on YouTube or Facebook (or other locations) can help make...

all the 'keep' votes in that discussion are of a WP:WHATABOUT and WP:ITSPOPULAR flavor - at the end of the day, unlike Star Wars canon, no reliable secondary...

and the keep arguments so far amount to WP:ITSPOPULAR. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:22, 16 October 2023 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR is a policy about subjects which might have...

including games and comics. --DrBat (talk) 21:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 23:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC) "But without a single...

Delete. Even if Aardwolf is in fact currently the most popular MUD, WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. Because of lack of WP:RS, it fails WP:N. The one source...

Please read the WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 13:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:49, 15 April 2016...

guidelines. Also, page rankings on Alexa does not give notability per WP:ITSPOPULAR. It may make it more likely that a site will gain coverage, but it's not...

than 10-15 years ago where such arguments were considered valid. See WP:ITSPOPULAR. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:25, 19 February...

[2], [3], [4] (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC) See WP:ITSPOPULAR. Do they have an iconic visual appearance? Yes, that is unquestionable...

will be coverage but is not a guarantee that it will be out there. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) It also doesn't help that the original version of the article contained...

ian-horror-experience Pur 0 0 (talk) 13:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC) See WP:ITSPOPULAR for why that isn't a valid argument here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:59, 11 June 2025...

GreenishPickle! (🔔) 13:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC) I know this isn't a WP:ITSPOPULAR argument, but the issue is that the depth of coverage relates to a very...

to notability. Demonstrate how the game meets WP:GNG, and also see WP:ITSPOPULAR. λ NegativeMP1 18:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC) Merge I agree that the game is...

reception, however being popular is not something that gives notability. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) It can make it more likely that there will be coverage, but it's not...

it's interesting (WP:INTERESTING), or even because it's popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR), although I will say that the channel's subscriber numbers are fairly...

WP:ENT. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC) I meant WP:ITSPOPULAR. A large number of views/subscribers by itself is not notable, it has...

for arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, like WP:ITEXISTS and WP:ITSPOPULAR. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC) I just don't...

Also, something supposedly being "famous" does not make it notable (WP:ITSPOPULAR). Review our notability policies. λ NegativeMP1 18:17, 24 July 2026 (UTC)...

cherkash (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC) That's WP:ITSUSEFUL and WP:ITSPOPULAR, which are two reasons not to keep on principle. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→...

is that while the mod exists and has a small fandom (WP:ITEXISTS, WP:ITSPOPULAR), that doesn't mean that this mod is particularly notable per Wikipedia's...

2024 (UTC) @Intothatdarkness Can you offer a rationale better than WP:ITSPOPULAR? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:19, 3 April 2024...

and so on, but "keep" arguments that cite those seem to be invoking WP:ITSPOPULAR in all but name - they're not reliable sources for anything else, so why...

goes, popularity does not always mean that something is notable. (WP:ITSPOPULAR). Being popular does make it more likely that there will be usable reliable...

Wikipedia article.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC) see WP:ITSPOPULAR and then come back with a rationale that actually carries weight. -- TRPoD...

something can be popular and not notable for encyclopedic coverage (see WP:ITSPOPULAR). Sources [1]-[3] are primary sources. Of the remainder, some are articles...

that to argue for inclusion. It's part of the reason why things like WP:ITSPOPULAR exists. It's insanely frustrating, especially with topics that by all...

characters (O-Z)" and not separating each characters, see WP:PAGEDECIDE. WP:ITSPOPULAR argument is not a guideline for notabiity. Also, idk why WP:NPOV is thrown...

give notability. At best all it shows is that something is popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR), but at worst it's pretty much just a bunch of people talking in a forum...

just because it is popular does not mean it is good for wikipedia see WP:ITSPOPULAR Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 03:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)...

that WP:ITSUSEFUL is not a valid reason to keep an article, nor is WP:ITSPOPULAR, WP:GHITS, or anything else at Wikipedia:Subjective importance and Wikipedia:Arguments...

order to show notability for KraVen or his fanbase, which is lacking. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Now when it comes to the whole celebrity feud, that didn't seem to be...

Swordman97 talk to me 04:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC) I see a whole lot of WP:ITSPOPULAR here. What are these examples of "more than enough coverage" in your opinion...

when that's considered is just too weak relying on lists, quips and WP:ITSPOPULAR.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC) Keep: Given the explanation...

Optimus Turf (talk · contribs) is another possible WP:COI account. WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a reason to keep an article. Nobody discounted it as a "Swedish...

or post release) does not automatically give notability either. See WP:ITSPOPULAR for more explanation. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC) Note:...

platform for a loooooong time. I'm not saying its useful or popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR and WP:ITSUSEFUL), but there is a genuine reason for this article to exist...

fact that he has a fan following and that some recognize his name (WP:ITSPOPULAR, WP:ILIKEIT) can't give notability in and of itself - it just makes it...

is not notable because they are popular or because they sell well. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Sometimes someone can be popular but still fail notability guidelines...

bringing over articles. Wikipedia is also not a popularity contest, per WP:ITSPOPULAR. This article reads like a FANDOM page. If this character really is notable...

be any different? - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR, WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS address all of the points you've...

consider notable. Remember, popularity does not equal notability. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Being well known or popular only makes it more likely that you'll get...

discussing. We're talking about JonTron, not about other articles. Second, WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. An impressive number of followers/purchases/page...

2016 (UTC) I have to disagree, @BU Rob13:, to me that seems like a WP:ITSPOPULAR-reading of WP:ENT. Narvaez, Jr.'s popularity still needs to be proven...

but I'd go for anything that gets us away from ILIKEIT/IDONTLIKEIT, ITSPOPULAR/ITSOBSCURE, IVEHEARDOFIT/IVENEVERHEARDOFIT, and any such other arguments...

stop bludgeoning Dronebogus (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC) Anyway, WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a valid AfD argument. If she was truly _that_ major she would have...

it's interesting (WP:INTERESTING), or even because it's popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR), although I will say that the channel's subscriber numbers are fairly...

although it can make it more likely that something will gain coverage. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Comparing this number to other sites' rankings doesn't really count towards...

[2], [3], [4] (Oinkers42) (talk) 14:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC) See WP:ITSPOPULAR. Do they have an iconic visual appearance? Yes, that is unquestionable...

or post release) does not automatically give notability either. See WP:ITSPOPULAR for more explanation. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC) Note:...

February 2018 (UTC) Widely perhaps, but not in any reliable sources. See WP:ITSPOPULAR.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 00:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

that to argue for inclusion. It's part of the reason why things like WP:ITSPOPULAR exists. It's insanely frustrating, especially with topics that by all...

WP:ENT. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 21:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC) I meant WP:ITSPOPULAR. A large number of views/subscribers by itself is not notable, it has...

reception, however being popular is not something that gives notability. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) It can make it more likely that there will be coverage, but it's not...

yoshi013021 (talk) 15:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC) See WP:ITSNOTABLE and WP:ITSPOPULAR. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:42, 16 December 2023 (UTC) Comment: So while digging through...

would still require coverage in reliable sources to show notability. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) There are actually a lot of YouTube and podcast shows/personalities that...

on YouTube, but popularity does not mean that someone is notable. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) It may make it more likely that someone will gain coverage, but it's...

since it was written back. Kept after a 2005 AfD that featured mostly WP:ITSPOPULAR-style arguments. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:26, 22 November 2015 (UTC) Keep. I've...

Wikipedia article.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC) see WP:ITSPOPULAR and then come back with a rationale that actually carries weight. -- TRPoD...

in the blogosphere, but being popular just isn't enough on here. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:07, 31 December 2014 (UTC) The above discussion...

07:31, 11 March 2020 (UTC) >>BEANS X2t 15:53, 11 March 2020 (UTC) That WP:ITSPOPULAR and WP:LOOKSGOOD is not a reason to keep an article, BEANS X2. soetermans...

be any different? - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR, WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS address all of the points you've...

respects" in a certain field, this essentially falls under the argument of WP:ITSPOPULAR mixed in with WP:ITSUSEFUL. It's still expected that a book will gain...

popularity itself doesn't give notability, it just makes it more likely per WP:ITSPOPULAR. The article states that clips from their channel have been shown on various...

guidelines. Also, page rankings on Alexa does not give notability per WP:ITSPOPULAR. It may make it more likely that a site will gain coverage, but it's not...

Please read the WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 13:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:49, 15 April 2016...

cherkash (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC) That's WP:ITSUSEFUL and WP:ITSPOPULAR, which are two reasons not to keep on principle. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→...

YouTube - and being popular on YouTube counts for little on Wikipedia. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) If it was that easy to gain notability on Wikipedia that way, we'd have...

Delete. Even if Aardwolf is in fact currently the most popular MUD, WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. Because of lack of WP:RS, it fails WP:N. The one source...

is not notable because they are popular or because they sell well. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Sometimes someone can be popular but still fail notability guidelines...

that WP:ITSUSEFUL is not a valid reason to keep an article, nor is WP:ITSPOPULAR, WP:GHITS, or anything else at Wikipedia:Subjective importance and Wikipedia:Arguments...

fact that he has a fan following and that some recognize his name (WP:ITSPOPULAR, WP:ILIKEIT) can't give notability in and of itself - it just makes it...

and so on, but "keep" arguments that cite those seem to be invoking WP:ITSPOPULAR in all but name - they're not reliable sources for anything else, so why...

of attendees does not really matter as far as notability goes, as WP:ITSPOPULAR holds no weight unless the popularity of the convention is covered in...

concerned that a lot of the article tends to focus on online popularity. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Being popular on YouTube or Facebook (or other locations) can help make...

goes, popularity does not always mean that something is notable. (WP:ITSPOPULAR). Being popular does make it more likely that there will be usable reliable...

order to show notability for KraVen or his fanbase, which is lacking. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Now when it comes to the whole celebrity feud, that didn't seem to be...

popular YouTube channel does not make the subject automatically notable. WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a reason. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)...

and deleted, for a lack of reliable sources; while it's true that WP:ITSPOPULAR and WP:ITSUSEFUL are arguments to avoid, the fact that these are things...

consider notable. Remember, popularity does not equal notability. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Being well known or popular only makes it more likely that you'll get...

WP:NCORP. While it survived its previous AfD it was on the basis of WP:ITSPOPULAR / WP:IKNOWIT / WP:Clearly notable. The NCORP criteria have been tightened...

essentially) isn't something that automatically makes something notable. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Now having a large fandom can sometimes make someone qualify, but that...

any policy based reason for keeping the article. They all seem to be WP:ITSPOPULAR arguments phrased in different ways. The article does say that "Dungeons...

is that while the mod exists and has a small fandom (WP:ITEXISTS, WP:ITSPOPULAR), that doesn't mean that this mod is particularly notable per Wikipedia's...

it to actually be notable.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 11:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)...

give notability. At best all it shows is that something is popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR), but at worst it's pretty much just a bunch of people talking in a forum...

for arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, like WP:ITEXISTS and WP:ITSPOPULAR. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC) I just don't...

will be coverage but is not a guarantee that it will be out there. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) It also doesn't help that the original version of the article contained...

discussing. We're talking about JonTron, not about other articles. Second, WP:ITSPOPULAR is not an argument. An impressive number of followers/purchases/page...

(UTC) What press coverage? (The other two reasons are irrelevant; WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a notability rationale if you can't back it up with sources.) –Roscelese...

Optimus Turf (talk · contribs) is another possible WP:COI account. WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a reason to keep an article. Nobody discounted it as a "Swedish...

(talk) 07:58, 26 October 2013 (UTC) you are really going down the WP:ITSPOPULAR as your first criteria? Secondly, we rely on reliable sources to make...

character that demonstrate WP:SIGCOV rather than saying WP:SOURCESEXIST, WP:ITSPOPULAR and the like, which doesn't help your point that much. If I have missed...

(talk) 07:58, 26 October 2013 (UTC) you are really going down the WP:ITSPOPULAR as your first criteria? Secondly, we rely on reliable sources to make...

coverage in reliable sources (WP:RS). Saying that something is popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR) or that it'd be useful (WP:USEFUL) are not good arguments to show notability...

WP:NOTINHERITED by it being a product from a notable company and it being used (WP:ITSPOPULAR) isn't an automatic guarantee of notability. However that said, there's...

actual "Keep" vote, it was not based on any Wikipedia policy, it was WP:ITSPOPULAR. It's impossible to provide very much weight to "it's fixable!" for an...

or PERNOM votes should be entirely dismissed, unlike WP:ITEXISTS or WP:ITSPOPULAR, but I think your vote should be given equal weight compared to SeanJ...

Unsure why the closer gave any weight to !votes of WP:ITSIMPORTANT, WP:ITSPOPULAR, and whatever "its valid" is suppose to mean. We've hashed this to death...

actual "Keep" vote, it was not based on any Wikipedia policy, it was WP:ITSPOPULAR. It's impossible to provide very much weight to "it's fixable!" for an...

although it can make it more likely that something will gain coverage. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Comparing this number to other sites' rankings doesn't really count towards...

Fredlyfish4 (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC) Again, ITSINTERESTING or ITSPOPULAR isn't a reason to keep. TheInsatiableOne (talk) 09:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)...

and of themselves to keep an article. (WP:ITEXISTS, WP:ITSUSEFUL, WP:ITSPOPULAR) Stuff like that can make it more likely that something will gain coverage...

longevity and popularity do not always translate into notability. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Also, notability is not inherited (WP:NOTINHERITED) by the club's association...

valuable to a lot of people as well, and while saying this results in WP:ITSPOPULAR or WP:ITSUSEFUL being applied, it is clear that it is an encyclopedic...

nom), who gave vague, unconvincing rationales of WP:ITSNOTABLE and WP:ITSPOPULAR. While User:Endercase was a a primary contributor to this article, their...

independent articles not on if something is in the zeitgeist (see WP:ITSPOPULAR), nor because editors think it important (WP:ITSIMPORTANT); nor because...

or PERNOM votes should be entirely dismissed, unlike WP:ITEXISTS or WP:ITSPOPULAR, but I think your vote should be given equal weight compared to SeanJ...

Unsure why the closer gave any weight to !votes of WP:ITSIMPORTANT, WP:ITSPOPULAR, and whatever "its valid" is suppose to mean. We've hashed this to death...

policy-based reason why the decision was wrong. There is none here, just a WP:ITSPOPULAR argument. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:39, 9 November 2025 (UTC) Endorse no error has...

and the keep arguments so far amount to WP:ITSPOPULAR. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:22, 16 October 2023 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR is a policy about subjects which might have...

Maile (talk) 23:03, 13 June 2023 (UTC) That vote rationale sounds like WP:ITSPOPULAR mixed with WP:ILIKEIT Dronebogus (talk) 08:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC) The...

Also, something supposedly being "famous" does not make it notable (WP:ITSPOPULAR). Review our notability policies. λ NegativeMP1 18:17, 24 July 2026 (UTC)...

something can be popular and not notable for encyclopedic coverage (see WP:ITSPOPULAR). Sources [1]-[3] are primary sources. Of the remainder, some are articles...

all the 'keep' votes in that discussion are of a WP:WHATABOUT and WP:ITSPOPULAR flavor - at the end of the day, unlike Star Wars canon, no reliable secondary...

bringing over articles. Wikipedia is also not a popularity contest, per WP:ITSPOPULAR. This article reads like a FANDOM page. If this character really is notable...

Fredlyfish4 (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC) Again, ITSINTERESTING or ITSPOPULAR isn't a reason to keep. TheInsatiableOne (talk) 09:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)...

characters (O-Z)" and not separating each characters, see WP:PAGEDECIDE. WP:ITSPOPULAR argument is not a guideline for notabiity. Also, idk why WP:NPOV is thrown...

platform for a loooooong time. I'm not saying its useful or popular (WP:ITSPOPULAR and WP:ITSUSEFUL), but there is a genuine reason for this article to exist...

2024 (UTC) @Intothatdarkness Can you offer a rationale better than WP:ITSPOPULAR? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:19, 3 April 2024...

Swordman97 talk to me 04:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC) I see a whole lot of WP:ITSPOPULAR here. What are these examples of "more than enough coverage" in your opinion...

to notability. Demonstrate how the game meets WP:GNG, and also see WP:ITSPOPULAR. λ NegativeMP1 18:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC) Merge I agree that the game is...

stop bludgeoning Dronebogus (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC) Anyway, WP:ITSPOPULAR is not a valid AfD argument. If she was truly _that_ major she would have...

character that demonstrate WP:SIGCOV rather than saying WP:SOURCESEXIST, WP:ITSPOPULAR and the like, which doesn't help your point that much. If I have missed...

Waxworker (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC) Comment Be mindful of WP:ITSPOPULAR, understand what you mean but notability-type arguments not based on policy...

ian-horror-experience Pur 0 0 (talk) 13:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC) See WP:ITSPOPULAR for why that isn't a valid argument here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:59, 11 June 2025...

yoshi013021 (talk) 15:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC) See WP:ITSNOTABLE and WP:ITSPOPULAR. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:42, 16 December 2023 (UTC) Comment: So while digging through...

than 10-15 years ago where such arguments were considered valid. See WP:ITSPOPULAR. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:25, 19 February...

including games and comics. --DrBat (talk) 21:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC) WP:ITSPOPULAR 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 23:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC) "But without a single...

just because it is popular does not mean it is good for wikipedia see WP:ITSPOPULAR Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 03:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)...

when that's considered is just too weak relying on lists, quips and WP:ITSPOPULAR.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC) Keep: Given the explanation...

GreenishPickle! (🔔) 13:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC) I know this isn't a WP:ITSPOPULAR argument, but the issue is that the depth of coverage relates to a very...

independent articles not on if something is in the zeitgeist (see WP:ITSPOPULAR), nor because editors think it important (WP:ITSIMPORTANT); nor because...

valuable to a lot of people as well, and while saying this results in WP:ITSPOPULAR or WP:ITSUSEFUL being applied, it is clear that it is an encyclopedic...

clear on what can establish something as notable: reliable sources.WP:ITSPOPULAR arguments are not sufficient. λ NegativeMP1 17:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)...

policy-based reason why the decision was wrong. There is none here, just a WP:ITSPOPULAR argument. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:39, 9 November 2025 (UTC) Endorse no error has...