Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bald and Bankrupt


 * 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 keep. There seems to be consensus that there are sources now present in the article that satisfy the GNG. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Bald and Bankrupt

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article is about a popular YouTuber, but there's very little out there in terms of notable/reliable coverage. Is what is included enough to justify the article? I lean no at this time. Nemov (talk) 12:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can find a few passing mentions about the show in RS, but nothing that grants Rich direct coverage. NickCT (talk) 18:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - The topic has received coverage in reliable sources. There are already quite a few citations in the article pointing to them. Eopsid (talk) 20:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Eopsid. At least one of these news sources focuses on Rich and his channel.  ❯❯❯ Mccunicano ☕️  03:33, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are several sources already in the article directly dealing with him or his channels as the subject. A quick Google reveals plenty more articles about him. Sourcing seems OK to me. PraiseVivec (talk) 10:48, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Also concur that sources seem sufficient Vember94 (talk) 01:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Looks like the article is part of the WikiProject YouTube project. Subject currently has 2.84M subscribers, I think the article improves Wikipedia's YouTube coverage and is adequately sourced. DavidDelaune (talk) 23:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete While it seems that some UK publications have covered his viral videos, this individual still fails WP:GNG. KidAd  •  SPEAK  05:37, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The article has a variety of sources not just UK publications. But American and Russian language ones as well. Eopsid (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. Vorkuta aka Benjamin Rich-Swift aka Arthur Chichester doesn't have any significant coverage from RS, so delete per NickCT. StickyWicket (talk) 10:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Bald and Bankrupt is cited by an economics professor and this article on Medium: 8 Things All Travelers Can Learn from Youtuber Bald and Bankrupt   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Germanbini (talk • contribs) 19:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)  — Germanbini (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep - Has a lot of subscribers, is relevant AlexdG (talk) 13:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Having "a lot of subscribers" is not a valid justification for keeping an article on Wikipedia. It is reasonable to argue that the YouTuber has received enough attention from notable sources, but I still lean it's not enough for the article to exist. --Nemov (talk) 14:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Per WP:ARBITRARY, having a lot of subscribers does not make an individual notable. That said, further discussion is needed on whether he's good enough to pass WP:GNG.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 13:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC) The article has sources, but The Daily Express and The Daily Dot articles are the only ones that are specifically about the channel. Are those sources reliable and significant enough to justify the article's existence? The Vice (magazine) source mentions the channel, but only in passing. There are a few local sources in the countries he visited, but does that rise to the level of significant coverage? --Nemov (talk) 13:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - I spent about 10 minutes digging around and this Youtuber is actually featured in alot of eastern european news sites. Unfortunately it looks like because he mostly tours India and eastern European nations much of the coverage is limited to those areas.


 * He doesn't have as much coverage in the western news outlets. I was quite surprised to find that that Der Standard published a piece about him. DavidDelaune (talk) 23:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment - Is famousbaldpeople.com a reliable source? Eopsid (talk) 08:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - Not sure if English is your native language but that was exactly my point. There aren't many reliable sources and most of the news coverage is eastern European. This is a talk page, those are not article citations/references. DavidDelaune (talk) 14:19, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - I changed the title on the Reflist-talk box to reduce the confusion. DavidDelaune (talk) 16:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Could use source analysis.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 12:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, per the DerStandard reference seems impressive and its true that there are some other RS in eastern-European languages pulling Bald and Bankrupt beyond SIGCOV. So my vote would be for the keep. ☆★   Mamushir   ( ✉✉ ) 17:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, it seems there have been numerous WP:GNG-level sources (from many different countries!) added since the original AfD nomination. Most arguments for Delete address citations/notability, so I reckon those have been greatly assuaged.
 * Also (and I'm not sure what specific policy to cite here) but there's evidently an ongoing directed campaign to attack this page — edit wars, sock puppets, increasing anonymous contributions, a whole bunch of brigading tomfuckery. Other editors have ascribed this to users from Reddit, particularly the /r/BaldAndBaldrDossier subreddit, but I haven't dug very deep. If I can find a specific post I'll link to it.
 * Nemov has clarified that they put the article up for deletion and have been watching it for some time, so it's unrelated to posts coming from /r/BaldAndBaldrDossier. They also helpfully linked two threads where calls for action are being made: . So the timing of the nomination is simply coincidental. As far as I can tell, no sources cited from that subreddit have made it into the article (which is unfortunate, from a certain perspective). I'm still rankled by the targeted harassment and brigading, but oddly enough a group of 3.4k members dedicated to "exposing" the host of the show is actually a persuasive argument for notoriety and retaining the article — though obviously not possessing citation-quality. If only they were so dedicated to verifying their information! Sigh. Still Keep, all things considered. –OrinZ (talk) 13:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per non-Western sources. WP:GNG looks at all sources that exist, not just English and digital sources. JackFromWisconsin (talk &#124; contribs) 14:32, 25 April 2021 (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.