Talk:Kim Crawley

not noteable enough to warrant article & other issues
This author has had little to no media presence. Additionally, the author asked for this article to be written on Bluesky and other platforms and seems to exist purely for vanities sake. Furthermore the citations as a majority come from the author's own work and are unverifiable via these sources. Last but not least, the article seems largely autobiographical and likely to be managed by the author it is about.

Suggesting deletion. 2601:603:5181:D80:D590:E01:F939:E72 (talk) 15:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I don't know about BlueSky. I curated the article on my own dime, not at Crawley's suggestion. kencf0618 (talk) 17:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * "exam on her first attempt whilst writing a book" - seems more like sales blurb than a biography and in any case - writing a non-fiction book and passing an exam at the same time isn't a noteworthy achievement. 217.155.74.2 (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

If the article remains, needs expansion
The article, in its current form is very much not notable however there are some instances that may qualify it to be notable. Namely the subject being fired during gamergate for harassment - then seeking crowdfunding for living expenses, continual harassment of individuals online, their racist/anti-trans/antisemitic "videogame" Hackers vs. Banksters, as well as many other instances where the subject has gained popularity/infamy for the wrong reasons.

Examples of issues that should be noted:
 * https://theralphretort.com/pathetic-infosec-idiot-kim-crawley-is-making-a-living-off-lies-406015/
 * https://youtube.com/watch?v=Q-WgnuG3Hus?t=881
 * https://archive.ph/eHc81#selection-1127.4-1127.173