User:Brandonhoilett/Jeremy Jahns ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( restore)

has since gained notability and has been credited in multiple news outlets. Brandonhoilett ( talk) 14:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep deleted. It took me a while to sort out the history. This has been deleted from mainspace twice ( AfD-1, AfD-2), with opinion being 8-0 across the two discussions. That was 4 years ago. Consensus can certainly change, but the current draft contains no useful sources. Most of the references are to YouTube video; YouTube is not a WP:RS. One is to a list of reviews the subject wrote, and the last is to some kind of statistics/trivia page. Please see WP:BIO for what we need in the way of sources for a biographical article. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC) reply
• Endorse and keep deleted- I agree with Roy that the sourcing is not suitable. Reyk _YO! 15:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC) reply
• Endorse and keep deleted - the refs seem to either not mention, just mention, or cover in the form of interview/otherwise non-neutral Nosebagbear ( talk) 16:47, 7 December 2018 (UTC) reply
• endorse and keep in draft space I can see that he could easily meet WP:N in the future, but the sources in the article don't get us there at the moment. Reasonable use of draft space however. Hobit ( talk) 03:37, 11 December 2018 (UTC) reply

John Iadarola ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( XfD| restore)

I was already directed to use DRV by closing admin. Same closing Admin has salted his decision by preventing editing by non-admin. I have added even more sources, we will be at 30 once I am allowed to edit. I managed to squash first NOM with a strong Keep vote. How they managed to get the second NOM through without my notice, especially with my history on this article, leaves me questioning how it happened. At this point I will refrain from ad hominem about the nominator. When I first came to this article I thought this guy was enough of a public figure to deserve an article, as I said originally, to explain who this guy who talks so much, is. Considering he is one of the top 3 hosts on the largest online network, while many lesser figures on his network have their own articles, it also makes me wonder why his needs to be hidden--hidden through redirect and salted. Trackinfo ( talk) 06:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC) reply

• Endorse AfD decision is a year old, seems like the proper result (a couple poor keep arguments, a keep argument which suggested redirection, a couple delete arguments which suggested redirection.) The reason it was salted is because you and others kept undoing the redirect in an attempt to bypass the AfD process, including a reversion of the closer at AfD two days after the redirect was restored from another disruptive editor here who hasn't edited much at all - GreyOverlook (would get a checkuser on that account). SportingFlyer talk 06:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC) reply
• Endorse and keep protected per previous edit warring to sneak around the AfD result. Reyk _YO! 13:12, 5 December 2018 (UTC) reply
• Comment. I closed the AfD, so I'll remain neutral here, other than to say that my only reason for protecting the page was to stop the edit-war. Having a discussion (such as this one) is the better way to go. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:43, 5 December 2018 (UTC) reply
• If you have new, better, sources, please link to them. For now I endorse and provide a bit of a WP:TROUT for editing the closed AfD a year later. Hobit ( talk) 03:41, 11 December 2018 (UTC) reply
  • I had not noticed the post-close editing. I endorse the trouting (and have reverted the edit). -- RoySmith (talk) 02:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC) reply
• Endorse. The AfD close was straightforward and the nominator hasn't given us any reason to reconsider the result. –  Joe ( talk) 18:26, 12 December 2018 (UTC) reply