Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barış Özcan


 * 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. As has been noted, YouTube followers are no evidence for notability.  Sandstein  18:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Barış Özcan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a YouTuber, who fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 07:19, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 07:19, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:28, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is about a YouTuber with 4 million subscribers who is pretty famous in Turkey. The article itself also cites multiple sources. Personally, I don't understand the reason behind this nomination. Keivan.f  Talk 20:14, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment Views, followers, or popularity are linked to notability but do not constitute it without significant coverage. We need an analysis of the Turkish language sources for reliability and not being WP:ROUTINE. buidhe 23:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The9Man  &#124; (talk) 08:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comments: There are a number of reasons an article is nominated. If we compare 4 million subscribers to the number of stars in the galaxy (100 "billion") then 4 million would be insignificant. That might be an apples to oranges comparison. If we compare rankings: Social Blade rank= 7,061st, Subscriber rank = 2,524th, Video views rank= 11,701st (reference on the article), "Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site" (policy) and some consider that Wikipedia is not YouTube. The number of editors involved in that essay might be small (16) but it is usually a significantly higher number than a typical AFD is decided by. Other concerns would be that being in a "top [extremely high number]" in the YouTube ranking is encyclopedia insignificant and not passing the threshold required by GNG. 1)- Being one of twelve YouTube "ambassadors for change" might provide more notability but that is barely mentioned, not likely known by the general public, or covered in-depth by sources I have seen, 2)- The subject reportedly has given "600 speeches at various institutions and conferences", as a "professional keynote speaker", apparently as part of his employment. This is not even mentioned in the article. If there is additional significant in-dept coverage on this it seems it would add to notability but I didn't locate reliable sources, 3)- A final serious concern would be the lack of a Neutral point of view presenting an advertising tone. There were some serious allegations, that the subject even addressed concerning FETO, but any mention of this is missing. If these issues can be resolved I think there would be enough for a stand alone article, otherwise I will have to go with Delete. Otr500 (talk) 08:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete we lack the indepth sources that would demonstrate notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - the Turkish Wikipedia has an article on him with contributions from multiple editors. Any Turkish language editor can help here to avoid any systematic bias. KartikeyaS  (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2020 (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.