Talk:Becoming Chinese

Notability

I don't think this topic is notable enough to have it's own article. I believe that, based of what has been written in the article so far, it constitutes varying and vague trends and memes that have been synthesized by the single user who has additively contributed to the article.

I think that if this topic is to be represented on Wikipedia, it would be more appropriate to include the view of "Generation Z westerners" on a page about global attitudes or global public opinion on China. Perhaps Anti-People's Republic of China sentiment should be adjusted to represent all global views or global public opinion on China. What do others think? Nyonyatwelve (talk) 22:55, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

While others chime in, I'll say my piece. The article is notable. There are more than two reliable sources that independently and significantly cover the topic, and many of these sources themselves synthesize these meme variations into one overarching trend about westerners finding favor with Chinese culture; it is not merely my own synthesis as the article creator. Take, for instance, the Fast Company source that identifies both phrases of "becoming Chinese" and "Chinese time of my life" as part of the trend. Next is The Times, where Cindy Yu names "becoming Chinese," "Chinese time of my life," and "Chinamaxxing" all in the same piece regarding the trend. Complex begins with an observation about "Memes about becoming Chinese," plural. SCMP begins from the "becoming Chinese" phrase and connects it to "Chinese baddie." The Wired and Dazed sources, finally, do tons of synthesis work as well across many popular phrases around "becoming Chinese" that have emerged since 2025. Take, as another instance, that many sources cite the same Sherry Zhu TikTok as the nexus of this trend from which numerous meme variations emerged, meaning that the history identified in my article is not one of my own divination but rather one that many of the aforementioned reliable sources have independently come to. All in all, this makes "becoming Chinese" not merely "varying and vague trends and memes" but a singular topic, with reliable sources, thus deserving of a Wikipedia article per WP:NOTABILITY. If you want to win a notability argument here, you would have to disprove both the strength of the sources of themselves and then also prove that these memes are completely distinct and separate from one another rather than an assemblage. Phibeatrice (talk) 03:03, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

I agree, this seems like an obscure social media trend and it definitely does not deserve an article on Wikipedia. Someone should nominate this article for deletion. WildriftJapan (talk) 10:57, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

It would be helpful for you to contribute a policy-based argument against the article's notability rather than a sentimental argument along the lines of "obscure social media trend." Phibeatrice (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

FWIW, the New York Times just published a lengthy article entirely on the Becoming Chinese social media meme yesterday, which strengthens its case for notability significantly. Jenny8lee (talk) 15:32, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! I've added that, as well as another SCMP article. SCMP alone has now written three articles about the meme in the span of a month. Phibeatrice (talk) 15:33, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

This seems like an exclusively English thing. I don't think this count as notable enough, especially when y'all know editors from other languages will straight up copy it ~2026-98033-5 (talk) 18:05, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia. Phibeatrice (talk) 18:08, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Seconding, Wikipedia language mirrors have pages for more obscure things if it is expected to be relevant in the zeitgeist of the language/countries speaking that language. I'm putting it like a nerd, but yeah. It is weird to spin this as somehow a bad thing in this instance because it is on the biggest wiki. I think this page should stay. Sebrana (talk) 03:28, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't think one person maintaining an article makes it not notable, most articles on this site are maintained by single individuals it feels like sometimes EnbyEditor (talk) 18:26, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

This is a social media trend, and while it is technically notable, is it really enduring enough or substantial enough to get past WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ROUTINE? Color me doubtful, and supportive of deletion. Woshiwaiguoren (talk) 06:46, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Neither policy applies here. WP:NOTNEWS rules out WP:OR and news announcements, neither of which are definitive of how the article was written. WP:ROUTINE also refers to news announcements, "Planned coverage of scheduled events," press release–type articles, and whatnot, none of which describe the sources I've named above that are are much more substantial in their observation of this social media trend. If you've stated that the article is "technically notable," then that suffices as an argument in favor its existence, not against. Phibeatrice (talk) 12:09, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

A similar discussion was had regarding Elon's salute. The result was keep Pancho507 (talk) 16:08, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Not Notable

Does not come close to standard for wp:n . Would support nomination for deletion. Mihir.pethe1 (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Nominating for deletion

I took time to review the article/sources closely and have concluded that the article should be deleted. It documents a recent social media trend that fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:N. It covers a transient internet meme from 2025-2026 that is primarily being documented through news coverage of current trends rather than established sources demonstrating lasting notability. The topic lacks sufficient enduring significance for a standalone Wikipedia article. Simply, this article's subject is not yet encyclopedic. Mihir.pethe1 (talk) 21:20, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Fight Club tweet

I do not see what this tweet adds to the topic. It is made by a no-name user who may not even be a real person. And Fight Club is not relevant to any other part of the article. A glance at the profile of "girl__virus" also shows that maybe 90% of the user's tweets are irrelevant to China or Chinese topics: https://x.com/girl__virus. So this content in the article should be deleted for irrelevance and lack of notability. Fbaldessari (talk) 03:36, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

A lot of the sources cite the tweet as the progenitor of the meme. Phibeatrice (talk) 22:40, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Progenitor? No, not really. A lot of sources including the one cited for that tweet actually mention Papist Dalton's TikTok post or IShowSpeed's trip as an earlier example. Dalton's post is not even brought up in the article despite being slightly more relevant than girl__virus' meaningless tweet.

According to WP:VNOT, information that does not improve the article can be omitted and the tweet appears to qualify more than anything else here. Fbaldessari (talk) 19:49, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Complex names the tweet, and I'm happy to add more sources corroborating its relevance to the meme, as well as one source regarding Papist Dalton, which I just found now. I appreciate your input. Phibeatrice (talk) 20:11, 19 May 2026 (UTC)