The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Comment Sources definitely fail
WP:RS however the subject of the article has 2.94 million subscribers on Youtube. I would think that this generally points towards passing
WP:N. As the article stands, I would lean towards deletion but I would likely keep for a
WP:HEY. GoldMiner24Talk17:07, 21 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Followers, likes, watches, subs are a bad measure of notability because there is no standard (not in terms of Wikipedia, but in general) for them - it is well documented that all of these can also be bought. We rely on significant, independent coverage in reliable sources. Wikipedia isn't a stat book for how many people watched a YT video.
PRAXIDICAE💕17:16, 21 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep – qualifies
WP:BASIC,
WP:ANYBIO and
WP:JOURNALIST. He's mainstream news anchor, reporter and Journalist,[1] who has worked on a few major mainstream news channels,[2][3] been invited to many notable talk shows,[4][5] criticized heavily for his income beyond means and links with the Military Establishment and the PTI, cited by peers, banned on traditional media,[6][7] known for being close to ex prime minister imran Khan,[8] many newsworthy allegations on him,[9][10][11][12] by him[13] and many more allegations and events.[14][15]Radioactive (
talk)
04:34, 22 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment – I've ton of references opened in other tabs, showing him qualifying WP:JOURNALISTS, WP:ANYBIO, WB:BASIC and even WP:GNG. Already added maybe 15 refs, but if I'll add more it'll look nothing less than refbombing (as it already kinda looks).
Radioactive (
talk)
05:21, 22 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I'd just like to note for the closer that many of these keeps are without basis - the sources above are 1E or unreliable.
PRAXIDICAE🌈19:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Comment Sources definitely fail
WP:RS however the subject of the article has 2.94 million subscribers on Youtube. I would think that this generally points towards passing
WP:N. As the article stands, I would lean towards deletion but I would likely keep for a
WP:HEY. GoldMiner24Talk17:07, 21 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Followers, likes, watches, subs are a bad measure of notability because there is no standard (not in terms of Wikipedia, but in general) for them - it is well documented that all of these can also be bought. We rely on significant, independent coverage in reliable sources. Wikipedia isn't a stat book for how many people watched a YT video.
PRAXIDICAE💕17:16, 21 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep – qualifies
WP:BASIC,
WP:ANYBIO and
WP:JOURNALIST. He's mainstream news anchor, reporter and Journalist,[1] who has worked on a few major mainstream news channels,[2][3] been invited to many notable talk shows,[4][5] criticized heavily for his income beyond means and links with the Military Establishment and the PTI, cited by peers, banned on traditional media,[6][7] known for being close to ex prime minister imran Khan,[8] many newsworthy allegations on him,[9][10][11][12] by him[13] and many more allegations and events.[14][15]Radioactive (
talk)
04:34, 22 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment – I've ton of references opened in other tabs, showing him qualifying WP:JOURNALISTS, WP:ANYBIO, WB:BASIC and even WP:GNG. Already added maybe 15 refs, but if I'll add more it'll look nothing less than refbombing (as it already kinda looks).
Radioactive (
talk)
05:21, 22 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I'd just like to note for the closer that many of these keeps are without basis - the sources above are 1E or unreliable.
PRAXIDICAE🌈19:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.