Talk:The Completionist

Notability of The Completionist
This article should not have been moved to draftspace. Khalil easily passes WP:GNG, WP:BASIC and as an Internet personality, WP:WEB as well. There were multiple in-depth, reliable and independent sources that prove his notability which existed around the time the article was originally created, including ones from CNN, Red Bull, Kotaku and GamesRadar among other outlets. For whatever reason, decided to draftify the article without establishing any WP:CONSENSUS nor even doing a proper WP:BEFORE search to evaluate that there were in-depth sources about the subject. As a result of such a bold decision, I decided to also make a bold decision of my own per WP:IAR and revert the article back to mainspace, while also providing a source table that proves he decidedly meets the notability guidelines.

Other sources that indicate notability - The Telegraph, Tubefilter, Kotaku #2 and Quad-City Times. Also, I'd like to remind people here that notability is not dependent on the current state of an article, but the potential of an article's topic itself - that is, if there is enough evidence of a particular topic's notability regardless of its presence in the current article. Boldly redirecting an article without properly verifying that such evidence exists sets a dangerous precedent of omitting articles that otherwise do pass the notability guidelines. Instead of redirecting or draftifying, if there were any concerns about the subject's notability it should've at least been discussed in the talk page first, or even adding a template to the page itself. If you still object to his notability, discuss here and/or send it to AfD.

*Also, don't try to argue that interviews are automatically non-independent. See WP:Interviews: "An interview presented as investigative journalism of the sort we associate with 60 Minutes can be helpful. In these interviews, the interview material is often interspersed with the interviewer's own secondary analysis and thoughts... if the material the interviewer brought to the table is secondary and independent, contributes to the claim that the subject has met the requirements laid out in the general notability guideline." These sources clearly fall under this category. PantheonRadiance (talk) 01:45, 7 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Draftification was due to this page's status as being made by a blocked user; it was of unclear notability. I don't think it was that crazy to do so, there is definitely no need for such pearl clutching.
 * In terms of your source assessment, I agree with the first 2 but disagree with the Kotaku source. It is about a single stunt that he did, not about the person himself. I think that CNN, Red Bull and Quad-City Times are the only SIGCOV here, but it barely squeaks past the notability line. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:50, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It is notable 2600:1006:B100:DAA7:2598:66A7:FF30:26A (talk) 03:29, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Apology (Indieland)
At no point in his video he "apologized for misleading donors", I don't know why that's there. The article should either be written neutrally or cite him directly. 2804:14C:656E:400A:85C6:BACE:204F:A558 (talk) 11:55, 13 December 2023 (UTC)


 * This is accurate. He gave a potentially lawyer tailored non-apology saying that he was sorry if people felt mislead, which is highly disingenuous since he would routinely cite a list of organizations he had donated to over the years. He still lied about the money being donated during IndieLand 2023 which is, by his own admission, up to a year after he was made aware that none of the money was ever donated. He was also caught on video several times saying that every single cent of the donations collected had been and would be forwarded to the mentioned organizations, specifying that none of it would go to administrative purposes, organizational costs, salaries and other misc. costs which was an intentional lie, as he admitted himself in the now famous discord call he took part in with his two accusers. He admitted to using part of the donation money to do exactly that and also reimburse himself saying quote it was only a few Ks, and not every year.
 * There is ample video, audio and text based evidence of all of this readily available online 142.115.197.168 (talk) 19:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Typo
I can't edit the page in order to fix the typo since I'm not an auto-confirmed user yet, but I noticed a recent edit added this, and the correct name of the indie company is "Sabotage Studio" rather than "Sabotage Studios." If someone could fix this, it would be much appreciated. Hylian Angel (talk) 03:51, 17 December 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅: Thanks for looking out for that.  Wandering  Morpheme   04:28, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Open Hand section
- Sorry, but as prominent of a controversy this is, I still don't believe it merits its own section yet. The purpose of the "Other ventures" section was to highlight the miscellaneous work Jirard did that is verifiable but primarily separate from his main source of notability - his career as a gaming YouTuber. Placing the Open Hand/IndieLand info there was appropriate because it's a side venture of his rather than an entirely prominent aspect of his life. Not to say it isn't significant, but separating this almost functions as a surrogate Controversy section, which I still worry veers into WP:UNDUE territory. If it should be its own section, it would probably be more appropriate as a Philanthropy one, but even that's still debatable given the nature of this situation.

I think a consensus should be made on this. If we still disagree, I think other editors should also share whether or not it should be its own separate section. PantheonRadiance (talk) 23:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect dates.
Indielands first event wasn't until 2018. Also the Open Hands website says they've led fundraising efforts since 2003. 2605:59C8:14E1:2D00:B006:C930:9059:EA9A (talk) 00:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)