- 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.
The result was Delete clear consensus. -- Anthony Bradbury "talk" 10:20, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- LeafyisHere ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Outside of the supposed bullying controversy, the sources that mention this subject, such as the TubeFilter page cited here, only mention him as one of the top-subscribed Youtube channel, which would suggest he has garnered a ton of interest, but that's it. A couple of reliable news articles have gone around lately about his controversy regarding him bullying an autistic man, but that's it as far as the "significant" coverage goes. Since the only real independent articles are about this guy bullying a disabled person, this article could only be be a violation of the guideline that Wikipedia is not a news source at best. The Wikipedia article at its current state is mostly unsourced, not even mentioning his bullying behavior, with a youtube chart list (the TubeFIlter page I mentioned earlier) as its only source cited so far.
I also need to make note of this: The image you're seeing right now in the article was uploaded by a guy who may be the subject of this article, User:Leafling Jr. 69. Leafling Jr. 69 also did a draft of the article about himself in January 2016, if that is really him, but was declined by an administrator due to no reliable sources. The only way the article as of now was able to avoid a speedy deletion was due to the addition of the TubeFilter source, and on a side note, the citation in the article misspells the name as "TibeFilter" which is pretty hilarious. What's not hilarious, however, apart from the fact that this guy made fun of someone's developmental disability, is the subject's questionable notability. Probably should be a redirect to List of Youtubers at best. editorEهեইдအ😎 23:29, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Just a quick update.: The link to the draft for this article by Leafling Jr. is actually at Draft:LeafyIsHere (Calvin). The draft I accidently linked to is different and was edited by different users. editorEهեইдအ😎 22:07, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Agree with nominator. There doesn't appear to be enough significant coverage of him as a YouTuber (without focusing on a single event). AFAIK, statistics such as views or subscribers alone aren't enough to show notability. clpo13( talk) 23:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of Youtubers. Although the article seems to not meet the standards of inclusion, the subject is notable enough to gain mention (although not enough for a whole article; see above). BlackVolt ( talk) 23:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. clpo13( talk) 23:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. clpo13( talk) 23:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete
or redirect, possibly with protection. The article makes no mention of the one thing he is even minimally notable for, i.e the bullying and feuding controversies and even if it did it would not justify an article. There is absolutely nothing here worth keeping. We should not be describing this stuff as "satire" and even "comedy" is debatable. There is also some COI going on here with that draft. I suggest to delete that too. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 14:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC) - Delete - nothing of any notability here. Fails WP:GNG by a mile. Velella Velella Talk 15:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect - funny that my PROD was removed when you've said all of the points I had in there, and yet people here are supporting it. Fairly certain his fans are the only ones keeping this page afloat, but it's pretty cut and dry.
Sock
(
tocktalk) 16:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC) - Delete, per nom. Simply not notable; does not pass
WP:GNG. From my knowledge, the
List of YouTubers article is a list of YouTubers that have a page. A redirect to an article with no mention of the subject would not seem appropriate.
Sekyaw
(talk)
23:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Honestly, I think youtubers that have been noted in reliable sources but don't have enough information to have a long-enough article SHOULD be listed in that page for that reason alone.
editorEهեইдအ😎
03:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- I see your point, but from the way the page looks, it doesn't work that way. Furthermore, I would have to disagree with you as the list would possibly be very long and would also contribute to many people listing themselves or other non-significant YouTubers onto the list, causing disruptive edits, edit wars, and so forth.
Sekyaw
(talk)
04:05, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- I agree. I am removing "or redirect" from my !vote. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 20:08, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
- I see your point, but from the way the page looks, it doesn't work that way. Furthermore, I would have to disagree with you as the list would possibly be very long and would also contribute to many people listing themselves or other non-significant YouTubers onto the list, causing disruptive edits, edit wars, and so forth.
Sekyaw
(talk)
04:05, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Honestly, I think youtubers that have been noted in reliable sources but don't have enough information to have a long-enough article SHOULD be listed in that page for that reason alone.
editorEهեইдအ😎
03:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Dont Delete Why should his page be deleted people wish for it to be deleted because they are "mad" or "offended" by his channel, anyone with a presence on the internet that has a wiki page unless abusive deserves to keep it just because you dont like him doesnt mean you should have his wiki deleted i personally am not a fan of donald trump but im not complaining about it. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.247.7.87 (
talk)
18:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- His actions are not the reason we're debating on whether or not to delete the article, it's his lack of notability and independent coverage in reliable sources that we're wanting the article to be deleted.
editorEهեইдအ😎
20:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- 69.247.7.87 ( talk · contribs) The article fails WP:GNG and WP:BLP. No one is targeting the page just because they 'don't like' him. Thousands of pages have been as you see here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, many articles are nominated for Adf. As well it is Bio of a living person rules a lot more strict to content. The first infobox on Talk:LeafyisHere has to be followed. Kyle1278 ( talk) 00:43, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
- His actions are not the reason we're debating on whether or not to delete the article, it's his lack of notability and independent coverage in reliable sources that we're wanting the article to be deleted.
editorEهեইдအ😎
20:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG. -- Dэя- Бøяg 19:08, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete one source; it does not come close to WP:GNG one refrence for a bio article is not near enough for notability. Just like it says on the Talk:List of YouTubers 'YouTube ranking and Google hits do not make an account notable.' Kyle1278 ( talk) 00:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
- 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.
The result was Delete clear consensus. -- Anthony Bradbury "talk" 10:20, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- LeafyisHere ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Outside of the supposed bullying controversy, the sources that mention this subject, such as the TubeFilter page cited here, only mention him as one of the top-subscribed Youtube channel, which would suggest he has garnered a ton of interest, but that's it. A couple of reliable news articles have gone around lately about his controversy regarding him bullying an autistic man, but that's it as far as the "significant" coverage goes. Since the only real independent articles are about this guy bullying a disabled person, this article could only be be a violation of the guideline that Wikipedia is not a news source at best. The Wikipedia article at its current state is mostly unsourced, not even mentioning his bullying behavior, with a youtube chart list (the TubeFIlter page I mentioned earlier) as its only source cited so far.
I also need to make note of this: The image you're seeing right now in the article was uploaded by a guy who may be the subject of this article, User:Leafling Jr. 69. Leafling Jr. 69 also did a draft of the article about himself in January 2016, if that is really him, but was declined by an administrator due to no reliable sources. The only way the article as of now was able to avoid a speedy deletion was due to the addition of the TubeFilter source, and on a side note, the citation in the article misspells the name as "TibeFilter" which is pretty hilarious. What's not hilarious, however, apart from the fact that this guy made fun of someone's developmental disability, is the subject's questionable notability. Probably should be a redirect to List of Youtubers at best. editorEهեইдအ😎 23:29, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Just a quick update.: The link to the draft for this article by Leafling Jr. is actually at Draft:LeafyIsHere (Calvin). The draft I accidently linked to is different and was edited by different users. editorEهեইдအ😎 22:07, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Agree with nominator. There doesn't appear to be enough significant coverage of him as a YouTuber (without focusing on a single event). AFAIK, statistics such as views or subscribers alone aren't enough to show notability. clpo13( talk) 23:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of Youtubers. Although the article seems to not meet the standards of inclusion, the subject is notable enough to gain mention (although not enough for a whole article; see above). BlackVolt ( talk) 23:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. clpo13( talk) 23:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. clpo13( talk) 23:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete
or redirect, possibly with protection. The article makes no mention of the one thing he is even minimally notable for, i.e the bullying and feuding controversies and even if it did it would not justify an article. There is absolutely nothing here worth keeping. We should not be describing this stuff as "satire" and even "comedy" is debatable. There is also some COI going on here with that draft. I suggest to delete that too. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 14:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC) - Delete - nothing of any notability here. Fails WP:GNG by a mile. Velella Velella Talk 15:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect - funny that my PROD was removed when you've said all of the points I had in there, and yet people here are supporting it. Fairly certain his fans are the only ones keeping this page afloat, but it's pretty cut and dry.
Sock
(
tocktalk) 16:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC) - Delete, per nom. Simply not notable; does not pass
WP:GNG. From my knowledge, the
List of YouTubers article is a list of YouTubers that have a page. A redirect to an article with no mention of the subject would not seem appropriate.
Sekyaw
(talk)
23:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Honestly, I think youtubers that have been noted in reliable sources but don't have enough information to have a long-enough article SHOULD be listed in that page for that reason alone.
editorEهեইдအ😎
03:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- I see your point, but from the way the page looks, it doesn't work that way. Furthermore, I would have to disagree with you as the list would possibly be very long and would also contribute to many people listing themselves or other non-significant YouTubers onto the list, causing disruptive edits, edit wars, and so forth.
Sekyaw
(talk)
04:05, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- I agree. I am removing "or redirect" from my !vote. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 20:08, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
- I see your point, but from the way the page looks, it doesn't work that way. Furthermore, I would have to disagree with you as the list would possibly be very long and would also contribute to many people listing themselves or other non-significant YouTubers onto the list, causing disruptive edits, edit wars, and so forth.
Sekyaw
(talk)
04:05, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Honestly, I think youtubers that have been noted in reliable sources but don't have enough information to have a long-enough article SHOULD be listed in that page for that reason alone.
editorEهեইдအ😎
03:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Dont Delete Why should his page be deleted people wish for it to be deleted because they are "mad" or "offended" by his channel, anyone with a presence on the internet that has a wiki page unless abusive deserves to keep it just because you dont like him doesnt mean you should have his wiki deleted i personally am not a fan of donald trump but im not complaining about it. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.247.7.87 (
talk)
18:51, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- His actions are not the reason we're debating on whether or not to delete the article, it's his lack of notability and independent coverage in reliable sources that we're wanting the article to be deleted.
editorEهեইдအ😎
20:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- 69.247.7.87 ( talk · contribs) The article fails WP:GNG and WP:BLP. No one is targeting the page just because they 'don't like' him. Thousands of pages have been as you see here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, many articles are nominated for Adf. As well it is Bio of a living person rules a lot more strict to content. The first infobox on Talk:LeafyisHere has to be followed. Kyle1278 ( talk) 00:43, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
- His actions are not the reason we're debating on whether or not to delete the article, it's his lack of notability and independent coverage in reliable sources that we're wanting the article to be deleted.
editorEهեইдအ😎
20:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG. -- Dэя- Бøяg 19:08, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete one source; it does not come close to WP:GNG one refrence for a bio article is not near enough for notability. Just like it says on the Talk:List of YouTubers 'YouTube ranking and Google hits do not make an account notable.' Kyle1278 ( talk) 00:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 17:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
- 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.