Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chester Stone


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 02:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Chester Stone

 * – ( View AfD View log )

whoopdeedoooooo a guy with 20k followers and no coverage does not even meet the basic criteria for inclusion here. No coverage, zip, nada. YODADICAE👽 23:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)


 * You're talking about this man: WoahCoin (talk) 01:57, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I am in fact talking about the same person, yes. YODADICAE👽  04:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I don't see how individuals like Simply Nailogical, Oli White, and Zach Hadel meet notability requirements but not Chester Stone. WoahCoin (talk) 14:18, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:OSE isn't a valid argument. YODADICAE👽  14:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:OSE can be used in a valid argument, I'm not saying it's a catch-all. The dude has a legitimate online following. I will admit that media coverage on him is not as abundant as certain others, but it's important to also keep in mind that he's an indigent minority with far less resources than the individuals listed above WoahCoin (talk) 14:26, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no media coverage, which is why he isn't notable. YODADICAE👽  14:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Did you even check the references list? WoahCoin (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You mean the non-existent ones? YODADICAE👽  20:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * WoahCoin, there is a existent references list, but the only sources listed are WP:PRIMARY sources, meaning the pages were created or self-published by him. The amount of WP:INDEPENDENT sources is how we determine whether an article stays or goes; profile pages on other social media sites isn't independent coverage. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:29, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for actually helping @HumanxAnthro. Does CL Tampa qualify as independent? I can dig deeper and see what else I can find, I agree that this may perhaps be TOOSOON. When I undertook this project, I hadn't realized his original account was deleted/suspended, which I believe would've helped me trace down more sources. WoahCoin (talk) 22:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You must keep in mind that using posts from his account don't establish notability. Remember, we're looking for sources independent of the subject. 👨x🐱 (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete or Dratify at best. The statement that there's "no coverage" on this man isn't entirely true, as I did find one CiTampa article on the guy, but that's still only one article about him and it's local coverage, which is not enough to meet GNG. His Instagram started only two months ago, and if he's gaining so many followers in such a short time, that maybe a sign he'll gain coverage from national reliable sources in the future, but we can't predict that. This is a WP:TOOSOON scenario. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not enough coverage from independent reliable sources to meet verifiability standards. Follower counts are not reliable metrics of anything. I'd also ask the nominator not to bite the newbies.Citing (talk) 23:15, 13 May 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.