Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Paris Hilton energy plan

222:. Information is unencyclopedic and presumes a real stance from Paris Hilton on energy policy in the United States presidential election. This gives undue weight to the position advanced in that video and is, essentially, a hoax (or, at best, false satire). Almost all of the sources trace back to funnyordie.com, where it was originally posted. I removed a section titled "commentary" which contained little more than a bulleted list of news articles that mentioned this video, but did not explain or elaborate with any meaningful encyclopedic content. It should be 3061:- Not notable enough. Remember, the subject of the article is the video itself, not what was said in the video or about the video (which of course if fair game, once notability of the video has been established). In this case, there might be a lot of chatter in the media about it--but references in the media are only evidence of notability--but notability supposed to be lasting. I doubt very much that this video has any lasting notability. Maybe this is worth a 1-sentence reference (assuming the original McCain ad "Celebrity" in 1082:

professionally-produced work by her. We don't normally merge an actor's appearances with the BIO article. Among other things this turns the article into an unencyclopedic list, and it ignores the other aspects of a video production beyond the actress who stars in it - the producers, the current event, the cultural context, and so on. As for the name, it looks like "Paris Hilton Responds to McCain Ad" is the official title of the video. That might help avoid any confusion over what the article is about.

2092:

likely stay an article. Knowledge (XXG) won't explode if it stays, and I won't leave if it stays. Still though, I'm allowed to say ick, and I'm allowed to debate someone that doesn't agree with my "ick". You are allowed to say keep, and I'm allowed to disagree with your "keep" (not just you J-Z, you just happened to be the one I responded to - nothing personal, I don't know you). I won't change your mind, you will most certainly not change mine. I will heed to consensus, as I always do. But still,

507:

there was a hell of alot of commenters on those two things, but became concerned if I didn't contact em ALL I'd somehow be showing favortism of some kind, completely forgetting about the spamming thing -- or rather, I'd skimmed right by that first section at WP:CANVASSING without its registering! Oops! Although I'll never be guilty of doing it again, it's true that I'm obviously guilty of spamming -- I dids the crime and so I gots to do whatever is the time!

1107:

election, and it would be very surprising if anyone took this supposed plan (just a simple mash-up and rehash, something a comedy writer thought up in an afternoon) seriously for more than the next few days. So true, Knowledge (XXG) does not need an article about this imaginary energy plan. It seems a little pop-crufty. But a more sober article about the viral video makes sense. Accordingly, I rewrote the lead to suggest where this article might go.

1317:

a lot of new ways for advertisers, publicists, politicians and the public to communicate and this is part of that movement -- it could easily be used as a precedent for others to build on in the future). I keep on hearing that Paris Hilton is a pretty savvy businesswoman, and this article could help explore that. Don't let the airhead image fool you into thinking this subject is just fluff. See the "Marketing uses" section of

60: 31: 2161:

about it. As I said, you've had also multiple members of Congress, commentators from major news magazines (granted Time and Newsweek do often have a lot of celebrity crap), Discover Magazine, and a variety of other sources including sources from outside the United States. If that isn't good evidence of notability, I don't know what is.

440:. Knowledge (XXG)'s standard is to have separate articles for artistic creations (say a song) rather than to decide whether to include its details in the article for the song's lyricist, musical composer, original recording artist, singer of its most famous cover version, and so forth. In the present case, should the coverage of 970:- it's definitely notable per the sources someone gave above, but as an energy plan it is, IMO, a very borderline hoax. Perhaps retitling the article to something like "Paris Hilton's response to..." and then expanding it, will make it more suitable as an article. On the whole I would prefer to see it merged with 2091:

I said I don't like it. I linked IDONTLIKEIT. I never said my point was valid, but it is still my point. I never said anything other than "ick" and that I thought this shouldn't be here. I'm allowed to think that. Based on this discussion, and the prevailing winds on wikipedia, I realize this will

1081:

involving well-known producers, a famous personality, and a somewhat infamous political gaffe. I won't bother looking for more sources but there are clearly innumerable ones to establish notability. Like it or not, Paris Hilton is an actress. This wasn't just an aspect of her public life, it was a

780:

to cover the video as a whole, and the media reaction to it (including the sources that took the "energy plan" seriously, but not limited to that). The video as a whole was notable, and part of that notability comes from the "energy plan", but the one-sentence "energy plan" is too narrow a topic for

1316:

it's worth thinking about the following: Will we think this is worth an article five years from now or a year from now? I think it's possible we will. Let's decide later. The mash-up between online video/campaign commercial/celebrity publicity seems pretty innovative (with the Internet we're finding

2964:

Since the video has been discussed in the media, you can make a case for notability. But since Hilton is not any kind of authority on the subject, media mention of the video is its only claim for notability. Let me ask a question of everyone: Is every youtube video which has been mentioned in the

2421:

The video is a legitimate work that gained over 7 million page views in two days and a large amount of press coverage. Because the video, even if it was intended as parody, received written and verbal responses from both candidates and a wide array of experts and politicians, it deserves its own

2160:

You could, you know read what I wrote. I'll try spelling this out very carefully: There are two points in reply to your remark: 1) Almost every Page talks about that gets printed is about topics that all of us would agree are notable and noteworthy. 2) This topic hasn't just had Clarence Page talk

1219:

for now. This is an ongoing political event and the main article on Hilton is already very long so it isn't at all reasonable to spin this off as a separate article. I don't like the attention this got and found it to be idiotic and another example of how low Amercian political discourse has sunk.

722:

If this article is kept, it ought to be renamed. The title of the video was "Paris Hilton Responds to McCain Ad" so that would be the sensible title for this article. The video contained a lot more than just an "energy plan". I don't see anything wrong in principle with having a Knowledge (XXG)

506:

To any admin out there, I throw myself at your mercy: I'd somenow got it in my head to pop out a wikilink or two to folks who'd previously commented in one particular campaign subarticle AfD's and one political satire viral video's AfD; but then, alas, after I got started, I started to notice that

2607:

That's a false compromise. If it gives undue weight to even mention it within her article, it would seriously overreach that guideline to have this as a separate article. Believe or not, there are certain things in the world that Knowledge (XXG) doesn't have to document and this trivial piece of

2571:

notable enough. Each time this incident is brought up during the campaign, by commentators or in the midst of the Presidential debates, people who aren't aware of the incident will look for the details, and this sourced article can provide helpful and concise background information. All of the

2014:

So, if Paris Hilton shits in a public restroom, comments on her blog, or wherever, that she didn't enjoy shitting in a public restroom, and wants to make shitting in a public restroom better with her "Shitting in a public restroom plan", and reliable sources say "paris hilton wants to improve

1106:

need an article on a joke political platform that's written in-world as if it were real. It's very well and good that some people are taking this seriously as a shocking sign that Paris Hilton has some intelligence, perhaps more than the other two candidates. But she's not going to win the

952:

As much as it pains me to say it, it IS notable only because it was acknowledged not only by every news organization in the States, but by several people that said HER energy plan made more sense than either candidates. Does it deserve its own article? not yet, but lets wait until after the

2622:

You do realize I'm on your side, right? It's all about "picking your battles" though, at this point. There is no way that this article will be closed as anything short of keep, probably as "no consensus". I don't want this article to be here any more than you do, CC. Until our inclusion

2056:

Wow, no it wouldn't. It would simply indicate a slow news day, nothing more. Again, I'll say what I said before, this will likely be kept, I just can't in good conscience be part of it. Trying to get rid of forks about celebs is in general impossible, under the pretense of "not paper" or

3141:. The topic is clearly notable and well-referenced, but I'm simply not sure there's enough to say about it to justify its own article; I think the information here would be better presented as a subsection of the Paris Hilton article. Failing a merge, I'd rather see it kept than deleted. 2259:

This will I think remain as perhaps one of the most permanently memorable highlights of this campaign, but sheds more light on the candidate involved than the speaker. It's noteworthy what the candidates will resort to, it's not noteworthy what the personalities they make use of will do.

1449:

Can you save all the country slang for someplace else, it's distracting and makes discussion very difficult. Now that you have canvassed all those votes, it's unlikely we'll have a fair discussion here, so I'm asking for somebody to help figure out how we repair the damage you've done.

2531:

would give undue weight to this incident as part of her life, and redacting it for merger would lose notable information. Although I would support merging the plethora of articles on controversies and events of the 2008 election into one article on such things (or one for each

2015:

shitting in public restrooms", would we have an article on it? Ick, is all I say. I realize this will probably be kept or merged. My life won't end, and wikipedia won't collapse in on itself. Again, though, this is why I said "delete" on principle. This is so entirely

2799:

Yes, it is. If a consensus emerges here that will save us time and process down the road and it prevents the deletion of the redirect so we don't have to have this discussion all over again. And since there is currently an identical section for all this information at

2076:

Keeper, I invite you to see if a normal "slow news day" invites opinion pieces by Clarence Page. At the end of the day this just comes down to IDONTLIKEIT. Attempting to preempt such issues by bringing it above doesn't alter the lack of validity of your point at all.

2677:

General comment to those with latent distaste for Hilton's particular brand of burlesque humor: I'd presume any commenting here would have already viewed this free video or at least perused news stories about it, especially those the proposed article references.

2572:

articles relating to the 2008 election will be re-examined after the election. Many will be merged into others or deleted altogether, and I suspect this will be one of those. But at the moment there's every justification for this to exist as a seperate article.--

1340:

This is an encyclopedic subject that Knowledge (XXG) is still at a primitive stage in building its coverage on. Now is not the time to be deleting an article that contributes to it. Eventually it might be merged into something, but it's too soon to tell what. --

625:

Just curious, what do editors mean by the novel phrase "false satire" in this discussion? Is there "true satire" in contrast to it? Obviously, the energy plan (such as it is) is satirical, but I don't think the issue of "true" or "false" means anything here.

1337:

ad. In this case, the ad garnered so much attention that it even ended up on traditional media news reports and other non-internet venues. Marketing firms have flourished from this form of distribution and now dedicate specifically to the creation of viral

885:

as suggested, but I'm more okay with "delete" than merge. Her article is already quite long considering she's done little of real value. This is quite possibly the most significant thing she's ever done or maybe ever will do. Granted it's not at the level of

2143:

Almost everything Clarence Page talks about is about a topic that we would consider notable anyways. And again it isn't just Page. This includes multiple members of the US Congress, Newsweek, Time, a few international sources, Disover Magazine and others.

1546:

I've absolutely no idea what you mean by country slang, so my first impression is to take it as some kind of personal attack? (Ie, that you're a regional chauvanist or something? What in the world did I say? "Ya'll?????") However, C. Clouds, I'll try to

2566:

I don't see how it's being given undue weight in Knowledge (XXG). I think those who have said that in the long run it won't be notable are probably right. But Knowledge (XXG) isn't a crystal ball and at the moment, while the campaign is running, it

2458: 915:- that main article is certainly not so long at this time that it needs this part forked off, nor is it likely that anyone looking for something about the video would fail to look at the bio. Besides all of that, the title is absurd. 2454: 870:, this is definitely borderline and I just sided on keep because I think our notability standards have other articles of less note than this. But, I won't feel bad at all if it's merged... I just want the guidelines applied evenly. 325:, but I predict there's going to be somebody who will go to the wall to try to save the material in this article, even if it's unencyclopedic and doesn't actually inform about the election, energy policy or Paris Hilton herself. 407:

do not delete. I think she represents everything terrible about America's celebrity-worshiping, but unfortunately, she is notable, as is that video/policy. As an aside, it's a fairly well-thought-out outline of a policy.

2661:. Redacting this for merger would NOT lose notable information. Fact is, such information is notable solely because of its association with a celebrity, and that's ultimately not notable enough for encyclopedic purposes. 610:

The content is well-referenced and a mention of it probably is best in her biography article. Cumulous Clouds is correct that the information was probably a false satire, but I do think the information should be retained.

2057:"comprehensive". Whatever. Having an encyclopedia about the mos trivial of non-stories/non encyclopedic material is so hot right now. Who am I to fight it? Heaven forbid PH decides to comment on the Sept.11 attacks... 997:

per Ferrylodge and Josiah Rowe. The idea of an article on "Paris Hilton's energy plan" is silly. But the video itself meets notability (as well as being a brilliant little gem, imo), so there's clearly a place for it in

2450: 1362:. I'm unfamiliar with the course to take now, as that user has (and may have already) been trying to torpedo this discussion through votestacking. I'll ask somebody more familiar with process to give me guidance here. 1943:. Delete on principle. What's there to merge? What's worth keeping? How exactly is this encyclopedic? Because someone else wrote about it? Ick. I don't care how many sources are there, ick. Go ahead and add an 570:

Perhaps satirical video is notable in Hilton's bio, but one joke isn't notable enough for an article of its own. Possibly notable in some kind of aggregate article on Hilton's acting works or something along those

1177:. It's episodes like this that give some fun to American politics, and it's having articles like this that keep Knowledge (XXG) fun. And the title's okay with me too, since that's what it's commonly known as. 1303:

It isn't a satire of anything. It isn't a hoax because it isn't meant to be taken seriously. It's a joke, like a comedy routine. Knowledge (XXG) covers comedy routines with articles when they're notable enough

245:

These linked opinion pieces go into informed detail about the "Paris Hilton energy plan" (the title of the article), pro and con, by knowledgeable commentators. No articles merely giving the video mention were

1999:

who is by no means someone who simply write celebrity gossip. Whether we like it or not this event has become notable enough for its own article and is too large to fit within the general article on Hilton.

2965:

media notable enough to have its own Knowledge (XXG) page? I don't think so. In particular, it seems like the original "Celeb" ad by John McCain does not have its own page. So what are the criteria?

1892:- Not notable enough to have its own article, but worth mentioning in a paragraph or so in her article. (Eventually, it may get deleted from the article. It all depends on how notable this remains.) -- 2201:

heh. Heaven forbid that Page ever complains into a microphone about how his breakfast of toast, cereal, and a glass of milk, hasn't settled well in his stomach. We might have an article called

1725:

should only be thought an attempt to enjoin all parties to keep to good talk-page etiquette: keeping the discussion on editing and editorial issues and not on editors and their personalities!

2588:

Even though I know that you are entirely right, and that my "vote" should and will be discounted as invalid, I just cannot bring myself to changing my earlier comment from "ick" to "keep".

2202: 2351: 1616:

compelling reason to do so. Additionally, I think excessive cross-posting about this matter on talk pages was a form of unintentional spam that was disruptive to those talk pages, and

1995:

I've expanded the article, adding in more details about commentators discussing the pros and cons of her proposal. Many notable individuals have commented on what she said including

1865: 2488:. Seriously, is anyone going to lookup either "Paris Hilton energy plan" or "Paris Hilton responds to McCain Ad" especially a few years down the road? Not encyclopedic at all. -- 1326:

combined with the randomness of "word of mouth" distribution, causes huge numbers of people to distribute a video among friends, co-workers, colleagues A famous example is the "

1194:

per above. Unless she gets asked to assume a cabinet position (that sounds dirty when you're talking about her, doesn't it?), this is one of those nine-day wonders that will be

211: 2422:

page at least as much as Samwell's What What in the Butt. The video's page and the page on the "Paris Hilton Energy Plan" should direct to the same page, as they do now.

3027: 2698: 1812: 1745: 1664: 1575: 1519: 1420: 1143: 527: 476: 266: 69: 593:. The McCain Camp used here for politics and made her notable in the election. Now they (and we) have to deal with it. "Factum" and not "at acta" (in fake Latin)! -- 126: 40: 1717:

it's not kosher fer somebody else to! And p/s -- I think if somebody says something translatable as perjorative to another Wikipedian and then would decline to

137:

on this AfD, and any merge/redirection in the future is subject to editor discretion and should only be performed with proper discussion and clear consensus. --

2732:. This incident, as an example of the absurdity of modern politics, deserves to be documented, but right now it's basically just a single news cycle's wonder. 1488:"Important discussions sometimes happen at remote locations in Knowledge (XXG), so editors might be tempted to publicize this discussion by mass-mailing...." 1048:

The energy plant this article is about is not noteworthy enough to have it's own article and was more of a reaction against McCain then a real energy plan.

178: 173: 2441:

I'm not even going to bother listing out the various sources, since... well, c'mon.... This is absurdly notable. Is it a long news cycle? Maybe, maybe not.

1926:- Unitl ms. Hilton does a few other notable political things, her positions and opinions are likely not independently encyclopedic enough for articles. -- 182: 2395: 2623:

guidelines change, it will be here, and I'm disgusted by that. Let me know if/when you attempt to update our guidelines, I'll happily contribute then.

3062: 1286:. Frankly, injecting herself into US presidential politics on a viral video is quite possibly Paris Hilton's most significant achievement to date. - 449: 165: 2823:

The video has become part of the campaign. Also, interestingly enough, the proposal isn't that far-fetched. The references establish its notability.

649: 1709:: "term is sometimes intended as a pejorative, often directed at persons from rural areas of the southern and midwestern U.S." So note that while 369:

This content is notable and well referenced, but there will never be enough material for anything other than a stub. It should be returned to the

297:

delivers one sentence on politics and this is to be mentioned here at all? I don't think it should go into the main article neither but should be

3160:

This video does have some interesting details, and might raise some controversies in the upcoming future, so I think it should be kept for now.

1691:

Cumulus Clouds probably just had some difficulty understanding what you were saying. The corn-top's ripe and the meadow's in the bloom. :-)

781:

a full encyclopedia article. Not sure what the best title for the expanded article would be: the official name of the video appears to be "

2941: 855: 2126: 2766:- There's clearly no consensus for deleting. To merge or not to merge, that is the question now, and AfD is not for merge discussions. -- 1909:

Notable but too short to justify a fork unless and until such time as she builds a more substantial body of satirical or political work.

1359: 1551:

good faith and assume you must be referring to something concrete, although I've absolutely no idea whatsoever what!! (However if you

782: 633: 580: 17: 3202: 3070: 818: 795: 1400:

for which I apologize and shall abide by whatever punishment the community deems fit, save hanging, or actual torture (even mild).

1385: 672:

even provides actual commentary about the video. Last time I checked, coverage by sources such as these made something notable.

2749:

Clearly notable (meets WP:N with no effort). The only question in my mind is WP:NOT#NEWS. But I think it isn't news per se.

1309: 1305: 1123:

I retitled it "Paris Hilton responds to McCain Ad" per the many comments above and now WD's bringing into focus of its lede.

887: 627: 574: 423: 169: 2932:. It's sort of some pop-culture/humorous "nine-day wonders", as Mandsford said. I stil don't think it has a place within 3169: 3150: 3126: 3099: 3074: 3066: 3049: 2974: 2954: 2916: 2898: 2864: 2850: 2832: 2813: 2794: 2775: 2758: 2741: 2720: 2670: 2637: 2617: 2602: 2581: 2561: 2541: 2517: 2497: 2474: 2431: 2411: 2369: 2339: 2319: 2293: 2271: 2233: 2219: 2194: 2170: 2153: 2138: 2111: 2086: 2071: 2051: 2033: 2009: 1987: 1961: 1935: 1918: 1901: 1877: 1834: 1787: 1767: 1700: 1686: 1631: 1597: 1541: 1459: 1442: 1371: 1350: 1295: 1271: 1254: 1229: 1211: 1186: 1165: 1118: 1091: 1057: 1040: 1011: 989: 962: 944: 927: 899: 877: 860: 823: 800: 761: 744: 705: 683: 638: 620: 602: 585: 549: 498: 427: 399: 390:

back into Paris Hilton. It's more amusing than most of the other anecdotes of her life, but certainly no more notable.

382: 361: 334: 314: 288: 239: 146: 119: 3184: 1262:

Could be referenced in the Paris Hilton article, but no need to have separate articles for every campaign add zinger.--

94: 75: 46: 345:

Paris Hilton has an energy plan? That's hot! Knowledge (XXG) has an article on the Paris Hilton energy plan? That's

2122: 661: 565: 1202:, no matter how many people watched it before the election, you won't be able to give away the video afterward. 733:

Whether this particular video is notable enough for a separate article is not something that I'm sure about. But

653: 310: 3183:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a

2860: 2846: 2809: 2613: 2190: 2134: 1455: 1367: 851: 839:. This fork certainly seems notable at first glance, due to the amount of media coverage, but definitely fails 330: 235: 161: 153: 93:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a

1944: 452:

article? In Hilton's bio? What's the compelling reason to stuff this viral video's coverage into Hilton's bio?

1471:"For example, to editors who have substantively edited or discussed an article related to the discussion...." 1327: 3040: 2711: 1825: 1758: 1677: 1588: 1532: 1433: 1182: 1156: 940: 540: 489: 279: 1483: 1466: 1381: 411: 2992: 2786: 2629: 2594: 2513: 2407: 2211: 2103: 2063: 2025: 1953: 1931: 1783: 1696: 1627: 843:. However, this is something that someone would check out and expect to find at the Paris Hilton article. 757: 740: 2856: 2842: 2805: 2609: 2186: 2130: 1451: 1363: 1066: 840: 326: 231: 3146: 2364: 1494: 1384:

methodology was stringently neutral: a few minutes goin' down the line, not skipping a single soul: 1st

1267: 1114: 1087: 999: 814: 791: 598: 2203:

Clarence Page has indigestion during Capitol Hill meeting after a breakfast with too many carbohydrates

1723:

go ahead and delete the conceivably offensive remark along with the offended person's question about it

1721:

what context s/he meant it in when asked, for the offended Wikipedian then to offer, such as I did, to

890:, but it's sort-of in that genre of blonde model-types doing something talked-about with politicians.-- 1389: 2780:

There really is no way, after this much discussion, that this will be "speedy closed". Let it run.

2493: 1779: 1692: 1623: 1070: 981: 895: 874: 753: 736: 357: 306: 3110: 1245:

case. If anyone still remembers this 6-8 months from now, could be worth a a separate article then.

3165: 3142: 3122: 3095: 2970: 2948: 2938: 2577: 2557: 2537: 2468: 2423: 1982: 1914: 1873: 1207: 1110: 1083: 844: 616: 456:

Also, I restored its list of notable commentary, this time adding it to its external links section.

2402:

video, for example if Funny or Die makes a series of these starring Hilton, we can re-think this.

911:. This five sentence "article" should replace the three sentence section that already exists in 3008: 2855:

And where are the reliable sources which discuss this video and don't just mention it in passing

2789: 2771: 2737: 2679: 2666: 2632: 2597: 2427: 2315: 2229: 2214: 2106: 2066: 2028: 1956: 1897: 1793: 1726: 1645: 1556: 1500: 1401: 1355: 1178: 1124: 1053: 1036: 1024: 1007: 772: 508: 457: 437: 395: 378: 247: 3083: 1973:, but I'm not really that convinced that this deserves an article. How is this even newsworthy? 2509: 2403: 2335: 2166: 2149: 2082: 2047: 2005: 1927: 1346: 1225: 958: 700: 678: 419: 142: 115: 87:

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.

2828: 2358: 1291: 1263: 1074: 809: 786: 594: 2988: 1775: 1242: 3012: 2912: 2754: 2683: 2489: 1797: 1730: 1649: 1560: 1504: 1405: 1250: 1128: 976: 891: 871: 512: 461: 353: 251: 1637: 1555:

come to explain yourself, I'll simply delete your comment as well as this one. Thx!) :^(

3161: 3118: 3091: 3086:, notability doesn't have to be lasting. Notaility has to be established just once so, 2966: 2886: 2573: 2553: 2533: 2462: 2445:

says "multiple non-trivial". Here's several sources, of which you can take any several

2117:

If you are so concerned about tracking everything that a journalist happens to mention

1975: 1910: 1869: 1203: 1199: 923: 657: 612: 2933: 2552:

So it's better that we should give undue weight to this incident in Knowledge (XXG)?

2442: 3196: 2781: 2767: 2733: 2662: 2624: 2589: 2330:

It's Kurt. He always says that. Closing admins generally just disregard his remarks.

2311: 2267: 2225: 2206: 2182: 2178: 2098: 2058: 2039: 2020: 1996: 1948: 1893: 1493:

Which my mind didn't catch. (Maybe a synapse misfired when I scanned that particular

1078: 1049: 1032: 1003: 391: 374: 3138: 3114: 2801: 2729: 2528: 2485: 2391: 2387: 2331: 2280: 2162: 2145: 2078: 2043: 2001: 1970: 1888: 1342: 1331: 1238: 1221: 971: 954: 912: 908: 836: 696: 674: 415: 370: 294: 227: 219: 138: 111: 107: 199: 2038:

If Paris Hilton's comments about shitting in a public restroom were discussed by

1334: 2824: 1318: 1287: 936: 2908: 2891: 2881: 2877: 2750: 2181:

mentions something we suddenly have proof of notability? Can we call that the

1246: 564:. New title and focus seems more supportable, but just barely. An aggregate 445: 723:

article about a very notable video, and presumably that's why the categories

1706: 1641: 917: 728: 2042:

and by multiple members of the US Congress then yes, it would be notable.

724: 2262: 1330:" video created by California recruiting firm Accolo, which parodied the 752:

based on new title and focus. Notable as a viral video, per Josiah Rowe.

645: 2890:, refer to the "Paris Hilton Compromise" when discussing energy policy. 2804:, it largely defeats the purpose in having this as a separate article. 568:

would still be better, and merge back to main bio isn't unreasonable. (

3088:"there is no need to show continual coverage or interest in the topic" 129:, it is important to note that this is a keep closure in the sense of 1610:

go ahead and delete anyone else's comments here without explaining a

1065:

but rename. It meets all the notability criteria except perhaps the

2019:, non-encyclopedic, and fan-boyish that I can't even see straight. 669: 665: 2306:

a valid criterion for keeping an article on Knowledge (XXG)? Heck,

1640:(...also to Wales) so maybe I'm sensitive about being called on my 448:? As a section giving encylopedic coverage to this artifact in the 2386:. She was hired to star in a video. Merge the relevant parts into 1314:

In addition to the notability which already justifies keeping this

1069:

essay. Plenty of reliable sources. It's an extremely successful

3003:

pretty iconic...we'll see if it eventually rises to the level of

3177:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.

2936:, but it does deserve a mention...in the Paris Hilton article. 2279:— The video in question clearly exists; nothing else matters. 1358:

has been hard at work canvassing for votes in this nomination:

1396:'til stopped by a genteel admin I'd spammed who informed me I 301:

completely. In any case this article has to go, of course, so

125:

As the above close may be a little confusing and has caused a

54: 25: 1636:

My patrilineal line goes through Kentucky and back to the

808:

based on new title and focus. Notable as a viral video. —

1027:(and similar). Plenty of notability and media coverage. ( 2987:

answer to your question would be is that, according to

2396:

Wikinews:Paris Hilton mocks John McCain presidential ad

2185:

test as a standard of notability in these discussions?

1108: 693: 206: 195: 191: 187: 2962:

Delete and put in a sentence on the Paris Hilton page.

1029:

Comment: Disturbingly cogent and coherent energy plan.

3109:, verifiable enough event, but there's no need for a 3015: 2686: 1924:

while I want to say keep, I think I have to say Merge

1800: 1733: 1652: 1563: 1507: 1408: 1131: 515: 464: 254: 2876:- this video has definitely caught hold. I just saw 2352:

list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions

2127:

Conversations from newspaper staff about celebrities

1284:

only if the merger results in no loss of information

3021: 2692: 2121:, I recommend you compile them at an article like 1806: 1739: 1658: 1569: 1513: 1414: 1137: 521: 470: 260: 1477:"Remember to always keep the message neutral...." 97:). No further edits should be made to this page. 3187:). No further edits should be made to this page. 2508:from this timeline? No? Oh well, had to ask.-- 1198:soon. Worth a mention in her article, but like 2310:exist, but no articles exist about me (yet). -- 1312:), This is notable enough as it stands today. 444:be a part of the bio of its creator, director 1778:. And stop saying "Kosher", I'm Jewish! :) 785:", so perhaps that should be the new title. — 8: 660:(the previous three non-US organizations), 106:(non-admin closure). However, the merge to 218:Page should never have been forked out of 3063:United States presidential election, 2008 3014: 2685: 1799: 1732: 1651: 1562: 1506: 1407: 1130: 1102:. I can see what the fuss is about. We 514: 463: 450:United States presidential election, 2008 253: 2504:Any chance we could go back in time and 2350:: This debate has been included in the 1241:. For the moment it is bsically still a 2461:. Take your pick of any several dozen. 1622:disruptive to this deletion discussion. 74:For an explanation of the process, see 45:For an explanation of the process, see 2995:article is immaterial here. (McCain's 1969:The case can be made to merge back to 1220:That isn't a reason to get rid of it. 2991:, whether or not there's currently a 1484:WP:Canvassing#Excessive cross-posting 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 1705:Hey Ferrylodge. From the WP article 1360:Special:Contributions/Justmeherenow 2398:. If it becomes as popular as the 1866:it's not a vote, it's a discussion 1308:from Monty Python which have been 783:Paris Hilton Responds to McCain Ad 442:Paris Hilton Responds to McCain Ad 70:deletion review on 2008 October 24 24: 41:deletion review on 2008 August 28 2608:popular culture is one of them. 2177:So let me get this straight, if 1792:Whoops! my bad. <blushes: --> 58: 29: 2728:without loss of data back into 76:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review 47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review 2224:Take it outside, people. :) -- 2123:Things that Clarence Page said 1: 2802:Paris_Hilton#Political_satire 888:Happy Birthday, Mr. President 2449:from any of these searches: 1947:below, I don't care. Ick. 1638:English northern borderlands 1306:including quite a collection 668:have all covered the video. 566:Acting works of Paris Hilton 321:I would also like to see it 3170:00:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC) 3151:18:23, 26 August 2008 (UTC) 3127:15:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC) 3100:15:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC) 3075:21:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC) 3050:22:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC) 2975:21:03, 24 August 2008 (UTC) 2955:18:42, 24 August 2008 (UTC) 2917:12:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC) 2899:14:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC) 2865:01:08, 24 August 2008 (UTC) 2851:01:08, 24 August 2008 (UTC) 2833:20:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC) 2814:07:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC) 2795:21:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC) 2776:21:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC) 2759:19:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC) 2742:05:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC) 2721:16:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2671:16:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2638:21:41, 25 August 2008 (UTC) 2618:01:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC) 2603:19:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC) 2582:03:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC) 2562:14:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2542:08:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2518:07:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2498:04:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2475:01:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2432:00:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC) 2412:23:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2370:23:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2340:23:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2320:23:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2294:23:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2272:20:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2257:Keep, but with the campaign 2234:21:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2220:21:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2195:21:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2171:21:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2154:21:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2139:21:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2112:21:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2087:21:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2072:21:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2052:20:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2034:20:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 2010:20:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1988:20:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1962:20:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1936:19:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1919:17:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1902:17:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1878:18:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1835:18:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1788:18:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1768:18:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1701:18:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1687:17:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1632:17:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1598:17:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1542:17:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1460:17:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1443:17:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1372:16:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1351:14:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1324:Humor, wit, and creativity, 1296:14:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1272:14:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1255:14:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1230:14:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1212:12:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1187:12:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1166:13:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1119:12:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1092:12:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1058:11:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1041:11:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1012:11:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 990:09:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 963:09:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 945:08:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 928:07:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 900:07:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 878:07:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 861:05:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 824:14:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 801:05:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 762:17:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 745:05:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 706:06:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 692:A note for the AfD closer: 684:05:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 639:05:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 621:05:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 603:05:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 586:05:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 550:06:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 499:04:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 428:02:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 400:00:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 383:00:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 362:23:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC) 335:23:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC) 315:22:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC) 293:Did I just get that right? 289:04:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 240:22:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC) 147:13:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC) 120:12:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC) 3219: 974:, than kept and renamed. - 3113:from the mother article, 1774:Let's cut C. Clouds some 1604:Justmeherenow, please do 1067:Knowledge (XXG):Recentism 110:is strongly recommended. 3203:Pages at deletion review 3180:Please do not modify it. 2384:Paris Hilton Energy Plan 162:Paris Hilton energy plan 154:Paris Hilton energy plan 90:Please do not modify it. 3117:, when it's only 42kB. 3067:TheZachMorrisExperience 2926:Merge t'wards Weak Keep 1328:Hiring the Right Person 3023: 2694: 2532:candidate/campaign).-- 1808: 1741: 1660: 1571: 1515: 1467:WP:Canvassing#Friendly 1416: 1139: 735:she definitely is hot. 523: 472: 436:Compare to the bio of 305:if you can't help it. 262: 3024: 3022:{\displaystyle \sim } 2695: 2693:{\displaystyle \sim } 1809: 1807:{\displaystyle \sim } 1742: 1740:{\displaystyle \sim } 1661: 1659:{\displaystyle \sim } 1572: 1570:{\displaystyle \sim } 1516: 1514:{\displaystyle \sim } 1417: 1415:{\displaystyle \sim } 1140: 1138:{\displaystyle \sim } 1000:Category:Viral videos 524: 522:{\displaystyle \sim } 473: 471:{\displaystyle \sim } 263: 261:{\displaystyle \sim } 135:no consensus to merge 3013: 2993:Celeb (political ad) 2684: 1798: 1731: 1713:can say "corn pone" 1650: 1561: 1505: 1406: 1129: 513: 462: 252: 2506:delete Paris Hilton 3019: 2690: 2527:. Merging it into 1804: 1737: 1656: 1567: 1511: 1412: 1356:User:Justmeherenow 1135: 1025:Amber Lee Ettinger 920: 519: 468: 438:Amber Lee Ettinger 258: 102:The result was 3047: 2718: 2372: 2355: 1832: 1765: 1684: 1595: 1539: 1440: 1163: 1017:Expand and rename 995:Expand and rename 926: 916: 822: 799: 778:Expand and rename 776: 720:Expand and rename 547: 496: 430: 414:comment added by 286: 82: 81: 68:was subject to a 53: 52: 39:was subject to a 3210: 3182: 3041: 3038: 3028: 3026: 3025: 3020: 2953: 2951: 2946: 2907:That scares me. 2896: 2792: 2788: 2784: 2712: 2709: 2699: 2697: 2696: 2691: 2635: 2631: 2627: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2471: 2465: 2367: 2361: 2356: 2346: 2290: 2287: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2109: 2105: 2101: 2069: 2065: 2061: 2031: 2027: 2023: 1978: 1959: 1955: 1951: 1826: 1823: 1813: 1811: 1810: 1805: 1759: 1756: 1746: 1744: 1743: 1738: 1678: 1675: 1665: 1663: 1662: 1657: 1589: 1586: 1576: 1574: 1573: 1568: 1533: 1530: 1520: 1518: 1517: 1512: 1434: 1431: 1421: 1419: 1418: 1413: 1157: 1154: 1144: 1142: 1141: 1136: 1075:political satire 1071:spoof commercial 1019:and/or possible 986: 979: 922: 847: 812: 789: 770: 646:Access Hollywood 636: 630: 583: 577: 541: 538: 528: 526: 525: 520: 490: 487: 477: 475: 474: 469: 409: 280: 277: 267: 265: 264: 259: 209: 203: 185: 92: 62: 61: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3218: 3217: 3213: 3212: 3211: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3193: 3192: 3191: 3185:deletion review 3178: 3011: 3010: 3009: 2949: 2942: 2937: 2892: 2790: 2782: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2633: 2625: 2598: 2590: 2469: 2463: 2365: 2359: 2288: 2285: 2215: 2207: 2107: 2099: 2067: 2059: 2029: 2021: 1976: 1967:Merge or delete 1957: 1949: 1864:- Don't worry: 1796: 1795: 1794: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1503: 1502: 1501: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1288:Smerdis of Tlön 1127: 1126: 1125: 982: 977: 968:Merge or rename 858: 845: 650:The Independent 634: 628: 581: 575: 511: 510: 509: 460: 459: 458: 307:Gunnar Hendrich 250: 249: 248: 205: 176: 160: 157: 127:deletion review 95:deletion review 88: 66:This discussion 59: 37:This discussion 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3216: 3214: 3206: 3205: 3195: 3194: 3190: 3189: 3173: 3172: 3154: 3153: 3130: 3129: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3018: 2978: 2977: 2958: 2957: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2902: 2901: 2887:Meet The Press 2880:, speaking to 2870: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2857:Cumulus Clouds 2853: 2843:Cumulus Clouds 2841:What campaign 2836: 2835: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2806:Cumulus Clouds 2797: 2761: 2744: 2723: 2689: 2674: 2673: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2610:Cumulus Clouds 2605: 2521: 2520: 2501: 2500: 2478: 2477: 2435: 2434: 2415: 2414: 2373: 2344: 2343: 2342: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2302:Since when is 2297: 2296: 2274: 2254: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2187:Cumulus Clouds 2175: 2174: 2173: 2131:Cumulus Clouds 2119:about the news 2115: 2074: 1990: 1964: 1945:WP:IDONTLIKEIT 1938: 1921: 1904: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1803: 1736: 1655: 1566: 1544: 1510: 1469:notices says, 1463: 1462: 1452:Cumulus Clouds 1411: 1375: 1374: 1364:Cumulus Clouds 1353: 1298: 1274: 1257: 1232: 1214: 1200:Farenheit 9/11 1189: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1134: 1095: 1094: 1060: 1043: 1014: 992: 965: 947: 935:per Jclemens. 930: 902: 880: 868:Weak weak keep 864: 863: 856: 846:NuclearWarfare 829: 828: 827: 826: 767: 766: 765: 764: 729:YouTube videos 711: 710: 709: 708: 687: 686: 643: 642: 641: 605: 588: 555: 554: 553: 552: 518: 467: 454: 453: 431: 402: 385: 364: 342: 341: 340: 339: 338: 337: 327:Cumulus Clouds 291: 257: 232:Cumulus Clouds 216: 215: 156: 151: 150: 149: 100: 99: 83: 80: 79: 73: 63: 51: 50: 44: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3215: 3204: 3201: 3200: 3198: 3188: 3186: 3181: 3175: 3174: 3171: 3167: 3163: 3159: 3156: 3155: 3152: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3136: 3132: 3131: 3128: 3124: 3120: 3116: 3112: 3108: 3105: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3085: 3081: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3072: 3068: 3064: 3060: 3057: 3056: 3051: 3048: 3046: 3045: 3039: 3036: 3032: 3016: 3006: 3005:Willie Horton 3002: 2998: 2994: 2990: 2986: 2982: 2981: 2980: 2979: 2976: 2972: 2968: 2963: 2960: 2959: 2956: 2952: 2947: 2945: 2940: 2935: 2931: 2927: 2924: 2923: 2918: 2914: 2910: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2900: 2897: 2895: 2889: 2888: 2883: 2879: 2875: 2872: 2871: 2866: 2862: 2858: 2854: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2837: 2834: 2830: 2826: 2822: 2819: 2815: 2811: 2807: 2803: 2798: 2796: 2793: 2785: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2773: 2769: 2765: 2762: 2760: 2756: 2752: 2748: 2745: 2743: 2739: 2735: 2731: 2727: 2724: 2722: 2719: 2717: 2716: 2710: 2707: 2703: 2687: 2676: 2675: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2657: 2639: 2636: 2628: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2615: 2611: 2606: 2604: 2601: 2593: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2579: 2575: 2570: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2559: 2555: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2530: 2526: 2523: 2522: 2519: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2503: 2502: 2499: 2495: 2491: 2487: 2483: 2480: 2479: 2476: 2472: 2466: 2460: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2440: 2437: 2436: 2433: 2429: 2425: 2420: 2417: 2416: 2413: 2409: 2405: 2401: 2397: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2377: 2374: 2371: 2368: 2362: 2353: 2349: 2345: 2341: 2337: 2333: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2321: 2317: 2313: 2309: 2305: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2298: 2295: 2291: 2282: 2278: 2275: 2273: 2269: 2265: 2264: 2258: 2255: 2235: 2231: 2227: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2218: 2210: 2204: 2200: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2183:Clarence Page 2180: 2179:Clarence Page 2176: 2172: 2168: 2164: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2151: 2147: 2142: 2141: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2128: 2124: 2120: 2116: 2113: 2110: 2102: 2097: 2096: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2084: 2080: 2075: 2073: 2070: 2062: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2049: 2045: 2041: 2040:Clarence Page 2037: 2036: 2035: 2032: 2024: 2018: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2007: 2003: 1998: 1997:Clarence Page 1994: 1991: 1989: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1980: 1979: 1972: 1968: 1965: 1963: 1960: 1952: 1946: 1942: 1939: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1925: 1922: 1920: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1905: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1891: 1890: 1885: 1884: 1879: 1875: 1871: 1867: 1863: 1860: 1859: 1836: 1833: 1831: 1830: 1824: 1821: 1817: 1801: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1766: 1764: 1763: 1757: 1754: 1750: 1734: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1715:about myself, 1712: 1708: 1704: 1703: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1685: 1683: 1682: 1676: 1673: 1669: 1653: 1643: 1639: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1621: 1620: 1615: 1614: 1609: 1608: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1596: 1594: 1593: 1587: 1584: 1580: 1564: 1554: 1550: 1545: 1543: 1540: 1538: 1537: 1531: 1528: 1524: 1508: 1498: 1497: 1492: 1489: 1485: 1481: 1478: 1475: 1472: 1468: 1465: 1464: 1461: 1457: 1453: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1441: 1439: 1438: 1432: 1429: 1425: 1409: 1399: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1383: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1354: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1339: 1336: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1320: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1302: 1299: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1285: 1282: 1278: 1275: 1273: 1269: 1265: 1261: 1258: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1233: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1218: 1215: 1213: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1190: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1179:Wasted Time R 1176: 1173: 1172: 1167: 1164: 1162: 1161: 1155: 1152: 1148: 1132: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1097: 1096: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1080: 1079:Internet Meme 1076: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1061: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1044: 1042: 1038: 1034: 1030: 1026: 1022: 1018: 1015: 1013: 1009: 1005: 1001: 996: 993: 991: 988: 987: 985: 980: 973: 969: 966: 964: 960: 956: 951: 948: 946: 942: 938: 934: 931: 929: 925: 919: 914: 910: 906: 903: 901: 897: 893: 889: 884: 881: 879: 876: 873: 869: 866: 865: 862: 859: 854: 853: 852: 848: 842: 838: 834: 831: 830: 825: 820: 816: 811: 807: 804: 803: 802: 797: 793: 788: 784: 779: 774: 773:edit conflict 769: 768: 763: 759: 755: 751: 748: 747: 746: 742: 738: 734: 730: 726: 721: 718: 717: 713: 712: 707: 704: 702: 698: 694: 691: 690: 689: 688: 685: 682: 680: 676: 671: 667: 663: 659: 655: 651: 647: 644: 640: 637: 631: 624: 623: 622: 618: 614: 609: 606: 604: 600: 596: 592: 589: 587: 584: 578: 572: 567: 563: 560: 557: 556: 551: 548: 546: 545: 539: 536: 532: 516: 505: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 497: 495: 494: 488: 485: 481: 465: 451: 447: 443: 439: 435: 432: 429: 425: 421: 417: 413: 406: 403: 401: 397: 393: 389: 386: 384: 380: 376: 372: 368: 365: 363: 359: 355: 352: 348: 344: 343: 336: 332: 328: 324: 320: 319: 318: 317: 316: 312: 308: 304: 300: 296: 292: 290: 287: 285: 284: 278: 275: 271: 255: 244: 243: 242: 241: 237: 233: 229: 225: 221: 213: 208: 201: 197: 193: 189: 184: 180: 175: 171: 167: 163: 159: 158: 155: 152: 148: 144: 140: 136: 132: 128: 124: 123: 122: 121: 117: 113: 109: 105: 98: 96: 91: 85: 84: 77: 71: 67: 64: 57: 56: 48: 42: 38: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3179: 3176: 3157: 3139:Paris Hilton 3134: 3115:Paris Hilton 3106: 3087: 3079: 3058: 3043: 3042: 3034: 3030: 3004: 3000: 2996: 2984: 2961: 2950:eUnshattered 2943: 2930:Paris Hilton 2929: 2925: 2893: 2885: 2873: 2820: 2764:Speedy close 2763: 2746: 2730:Paris Hilton 2725: 2714: 2713: 2705: 2701: 2658: 2568: 2529:Paris Hilton 2524: 2510:Father Goose 2505: 2486:Paris Hilton 2481: 2446: 2439:Obvious keep 2438: 2418: 2404:Flatterworld 2399: 2392:Funny or Die 2388:Paris Hilton 2383: 2379: 2375: 2347: 2307: 2303: 2284: 2276: 2261: 2256: 2118: 2094: 2093: 2016: 1992: 1983: 1981: 1974: 1971:Paris Hilton 1966: 1940: 1928:Rocksanddirt 1923: 1906: 1889:Paris Hilton 1886: 1861: 1828: 1827: 1819: 1815: 1761: 1760: 1752: 1748: 1722: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1680: 1679: 1671: 1667: 1618: 1617: 1612: 1611: 1606: 1605: 1591: 1590: 1582: 1578: 1552: 1548: 1535: 1534: 1526: 1522: 1495: 1490: 1487: 1479: 1476: 1473: 1470: 1436: 1435: 1427: 1423: 1397: 1393: 1332:Paris Hilton 1323: 1322: 1313: 1300: 1283: 1280: 1276: 1259: 1239:Paris Hilton 1234: 1216: 1195: 1191: 1174: 1159: 1158: 1150: 1146: 1103: 1099: 1062: 1045: 1028: 1020: 1016: 994: 983: 975: 972:Paris Hilton 967: 953:election. -- 949: 932: 913:Paris Hilton 909:Paris Hilton 904: 882: 867: 850: 849: 841:WP:Recentism 837:Paris Hilton 832: 805: 777: 749: 732: 725:Viral videos 719: 715: 714: 695: 673: 670:This article 662:the LA Times 654:Times Online 607: 590: 569: 561: 558: 543: 542: 534: 530: 492: 491: 483: 479: 455: 441: 433: 404: 387: 371:Paris Hilton 366: 350: 346: 322: 302: 298: 295:Paris Hilton 282: 281: 273: 269: 228:Paris Hilton 223: 220:Paris Hilton 217: 134: 130: 108:Paris Hilton 103: 101: 89: 86: 65: 36: 3133:Preferably 2983:Well, what 2360:Fabrictramp 2277:Speedy keep 1319:Viral video 1310:kept at AfD 1264:Cube lurker 1243:WP:NOT#NEWS 1100:and refocus 810:Josiah Rowe 787:Josiah Rowe 595:Floridianed 410:—Preceding 133:. There is 2934:notability 2882:Tom Brokaw 2878:Gwen Ifill 2490:Dougie WII 2400:Obama Girl 2366:talk to me 2281:Kurt Weber 1780:Ferrylodge 1693:Ferrylodge 1624:Ferrylodge 1382:canvassing 1335:Carl's Jr. 892:T. Anthony 754:Ferrylodge 737:Ferrylodge 446:Adam McKay 354:Ecoleetage 131:not delete 3162:Mertozoro 3158:Weak Keep 3119:Deamon138 3092:Deamon138 2967:Vegasprof 2928:- Put w/ 2747:weak keep 2574:The Bruce 2554:Mandsford 2534:The Bruce 2464:rootology 2304:existence 2017:momentary 1911:Ningauble 1887:Merge to 1870:Ningauble 1707:corn pone 1642:corn pone 1482:But then 1388:and then 1321:article: 1204:Mandsford 1196:forgotten 613:Happyme22 373:article. 246:included. 3197:Category 3143:Terraxos 3137:back to 3084:WP:NTEMP 3007:or not.) 2768:Hnsampat 2734:RayAYang 2663:Bdell555 2484:back to 2424:Hvalross 2312:Hnsampat 2226:Hnsampat 1894:Hnsampat 1394:That is, 1237:back to 1111:Wikidemo 1084:Wikidemo 1050:Brothejr 1033:Scjessey 1004:Cgingold 819:contribs 796:contribs 731:exist. 666:Newsweek 424:contribs 412:unsigned 392:Jclemens 375:Wronkiew 226:back to 212:View log 3111:spinout 3080:Comment 3059:Delete' 2678:Thanks. 2332:JoshuaZ 2163:JoshuaZ 2146:JoshuaZ 2079:JoshuaZ 2044:JoshuaZ 2002:JoshuaZ 1993:comment 1862:Comment 1719:explain 1343:Noroton 1222:JoshuaZ 955:Hourick 857:My work 716:Comment 697:seresin 675:seresin 658:The BBC 562:Neutral 416:Vrefron 323:deleted 299:deleted 179:protect 174:history 139:PeaceNT 3082:: Per 2989:WP:WAX 2825:Ngchen 2783:Keeper 2626:Keeper 2591:Keeper 2457:, and 2394:, and 2378:There 2376:Merge. 2289:Colts! 2208:Keeper 2100:Keeper 2060:Keeper 2022:Keeper 1977:Enigma 1950:Keeper 1549:assume 1486:said, 1338:video. 978:Samuel 937:Stifle 883:Rename 351:Delete 224:merged 207:delete 183:delete 112:Ruslik 3135:merge 3107:Merge 2997:Celeb 2909:Hobit 2894:Kelly 2751:Hobit 2726:Merge 2659:Merge 2482:Merge 2447:dozen 2419:Keep. 1907:Merge 1776:slack 1553:don't 1499:....) 1480:check 1474:check 1392:. ... 1281:merge 1260:Merge 1247:Nsk92 1235:Merge 1192:Merge 1104:don't 1046:Merge 1031:) -- 1023:with 1021:merge 950:Merge 933:Merge 907:into 905:Merge 835:into 833:Merge 629:LotLE 608:Merge 576:LotLE 571:line. 559:Merge 434:KEEP. 405:Merge 388:Merge 367:Merge 349:hot! 303:merge 210:) – ( 200:views 192:watch 188:links 16:< 3166:talk 3147:talk 3123:talk 3096:talk 3071:talk 3044:( ) 3035:here 2971:talk 2913:talk 2874:Keep 2861:talk 2847:talk 2829:talk 2821:Keep 2810:talk 2772:talk 2755:talk 2738:talk 2715:( ) 2706:here 2667:talk 2614:talk 2578:talk 2558:talk 2538:talk 2525:Keep 2514:talk 2494:talk 2459:here 2455:here 2451:here 2443:WP:N 2428:talk 2408:talk 2348:Note 2336:talk 2316:talk 2268:talk 2230:talk 2191:talk 2167:talk 2150:talk 2135:talk 2095:ick. 2083:talk 2048:talk 2006:talk 1932:talk 1915:talk 1898:talk 1874:talk 1829:( ) 1820:here 1784:talk 1762:( ) 1753:here 1697:talk 1681:( ) 1672:here 1628:talk 1613:very 1592:( ) 1583:here 1536:( ) 1527:here 1496:graf 1491:oops 1456:talk 1437:( ) 1428:here 1398:was: 1390:here 1386:here 1368:talk 1347:talk 1301:Keep 1292:talk 1277:Keep 1268:talk 1251:talk 1226:talk 1217:keep 1208:talk 1183:talk 1175:Keep 1160:( ) 1151:here 1115:talk 1088:talk 1063:Keep 1054:talk 1037:talk 1008:talk 959:talk 941:talk 924:talk 918:Tvoz 896:talk 872:gren 815:talk 806:Keep 792:talk 758:talk 750:Keep 741:talk 727:and 664:and 635:talk 617:talk 599:talk 591:KEEP 582:talk 544:( ) 535:here 493:( ) 484:here 420:talk 396:talk 379:talk 358:talk 331:talk 311:talk 283:( ) 274:here 236:talk 196:logs 170:talk 166:edit 143:talk 116:talk 104:Keep 3037:now 3031:ust 2999:ad 2884:on 2708:now 2702:ust 2382:no 2357:-- 2354:. 2263:DGG 2205:. 2125:or 1941:Ick 1822:now 1816:ust 1755:now 1749:ust 1674:now 1668:ust 1619:not 1607:not 1585:now 1579:ust 1529:now 1523:ust 1430:now 1424:ust 1380:My 1279:or 1153:now 1147:ust 1098:... 984:Tan 875:グレン 537:now 531:ust 486:now 480:ust 347:not 276:now 270:ust 3199:: 3168:) 3149:) 3125:) 3098:) 3090:. 3073:) 3065:-- 3033:me 3017:∼ 3001:is 2985:my 2973:) 2915:) 2863:) 2849:) 2831:) 2812:) 2791:76 2774:) 2757:) 2740:) 2704:me 2688:∼ 2669:) 2634:76 2616:) 2599:76 2580:) 2569:is 2560:) 2540:) 2516:) 2496:) 2473:) 2453:, 2430:) 2410:) 2390:, 2380:is 2363:| 2338:) 2318:) 2292:) 2286:Go 2270:) 2232:) 2216:76 2193:) 2169:) 2152:) 2137:) 2129:. 2108:76 2085:) 2068:76 2050:) 2030:76 2008:) 1958:76 1934:) 1917:) 1900:) 1876:) 1868:. 1818:me 1802:∼ 1786:) 1751:me 1735:∼ 1699:) 1670:me 1654:∼ 1630:) 1581:me 1565:∼ 1525:me 1509:∼ 1458:) 1426:me 1410:∼ 1370:) 1349:) 1294:) 1270:) 1253:) 1228:) 1210:) 1185:) 1149:me 1133:∼ 1117:) 1090:) 1077:/ 1073:/ 1056:) 1039:) 1010:) 1002:. 961:) 943:) 898:) 817:• 794:• 760:) 743:) 701:¡? 699:( 679:¡? 677:( 656:, 652:, 648:, 619:) 601:) 573:) 533:me 517:∼ 482:me 466:∼ 426:) 422:• 398:) 381:) 360:) 333:) 313:) 272:me 256:∼ 238:) 230:. 198:| 194:| 190:| 186:| 181:| 177:| 172:| 168:| 145:) 118:) 72:. 43:. 3164:( 3145:( 3121:( 3094:( 3069:( 3029:J 2969:( 2944:c 2939:I 2911:( 2859:( 2845:( 2827:( 2808:( 2787:ǀ 2770:( 2753:( 2736:( 2700:J 2665:( 2630:ǀ 2612:( 2595:ǀ 2576:( 2556:( 2536:( 2512:( 2492:( 2470:T 2467:( 2426:( 2406:( 2334:( 2314:( 2308:I 2283:( 2266:( 2228:( 2212:ǀ 2189:( 2165:( 2148:( 2133:( 2114:- 2104:ǀ 2081:( 2064:ǀ 2046:( 2026:ǀ 2004:( 1954:ǀ 1930:( 1913:( 1896:( 1872:( 1814:J 1782:( 1747:J 1711:I 1695:( 1666:J 1644:. 1626:( 1577:J 1521:J 1454:( 1422:J 1366:( 1345:( 1304:( 1290:( 1266:( 1249:( 1224:( 1206:( 1181:( 1145:J 1113:( 1086:( 1052:( 1035:( 1006:( 957:( 939:( 921:/ 894:( 821:) 813:( 798:) 790:( 775:) 771:( 756:( 739:( 703:) 681:) 632:× 615:( 597:( 579:× 529:J 478:J 418:( 394:( 377:( 356:( 329:( 309:( 268:J 234:( 214:) 204:( 202:) 164:( 141:( 114:( 78:. 49:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Paris Hilton energy plan - Knowledge (XXG)

Index