Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob's Your Uncle (Youtuber)


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:38, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Bob's Your Uncle (Youtuber)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested speedy (nominated as A7 by User:NottNott and contested by User:Adam9007). I think Adam's rationale, "I'd say being discussed on notable online platforms is significant.", is on the money: there's probably enough here to satisfy CSD, but where are the reliable sources? At the moment the article relies upon a combination of self-published/automatically generated sources, the channel's own videos, and online forum debates.

The sources that come closest to establishing notability at the moment are:
 * http://food.ulifestyle.com.hk/restaurant/news/feature/%E7%85%AE%E9%A3%9F%E7%B4%85%E4%BA%BA+%E9%A3%9F%E8%AD%9C+%E7%85%AE%E5%AE%B6%E7%94%B7%E4%BA%BA
 * https://yahoo-food.myguide.hk/d/2014111737376/

But these seem to fall short as well (although the first is promising). Perhaps someone not as reliant as me on Google Translate could glance over, and also help in a good faith search for additional sources? Thanks! As it stands, for the reasons outlined above, I think this probably fails WP:GNG. Best, - Jarry1250 [Vacation needed] 10:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC) - Jarry1250 [Vacation needed] 10:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:49, 4 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Tentative keep (because I haven't got time to go into this in detail). In contrast to Jarry's opinion, I think the two sources Jarry discussed above do confer notability because they go into some biographical detail. The article needs some rework but I don't see anything that desperately needs to be deleted per BLP. Deryck C. 16:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and Draft instead as this is still questionable as I imagine the coverage is simply the expected. There could be better improvements and if there's not made swiftly, we can wait later for an article. SwisterTwister   talk  02:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Probably not notable. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 19:26, 11 April 2016 (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.