Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Stuckmann (YouTube personality)


 * 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. Sorry, no salting. We don't salt articles just because of one AfD; repeated recreation would be a better case for salting Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Chris Stuckmann (YouTube personality)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is a transparent forum shopping attempt to squeeze in a topic that has, as noted on the Talk page, "been speedily deleted four times previously", is tagged for a lack of verifiable notability per WP:GNG, and has been declined three times in the WP:Articles for Creation process. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:35, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions.  M assiveYR   ♠  16:42, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:54, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete since as far as I can tell, he does not meet WP:CREATIVE. This is the only qualifying source I could find. This seems way too brief to qualify. If other sources can be provided, I'd be happy to reconsider. It's completely possible that notability under Wikipedia's standards could be established on a later date, but right now, the article focuses entirely too much on primary sources or sources that do not actually discuss him as a figure but rather mention his work incidentally. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 17:14, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing here constitutes an automatic pass of any subject-specific inclusion criterion (YouTubers are not granted an automatic presumption of notability just because their self-published content on YouTube provides metaverification that they exist), and the article is not referenced to enough substantive reliable source coverage about him to clear WP:GNG — the references here are almost all primary sources, and the only two that actually count as reliable sources are both local media outlets in his own hometown and the nearest larger city to it, and thus don't constitute enough coverage of him. (And anyway, they aren't verifying any substantial information about him, but are simply quoting his opinions on a list of films.) And it isn't appropriate or acceptable Wikipedia process to evade WP:SALT and/or bypass WP:AFC rejections by recreating the deleted article at an unnecessarily disambiguated alternate title and then admin-shopping to get the page moved overtop the salted title, either. The key to getting a deleted article back into Wikipedia is to properly address the reasons why it got deleted in the first place: namely by providing a stronger notability claim, and better sourcing for it, than this article is showing. Bearcat (talk) 17:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The Ohio.com link may count towards notability but I'm seeing little other indication of it, and on its own it is not enough. Artw (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 18:49, 4 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete ridiculously promotional. The YouTube view counts don't suggest that he's notable, and there's no secondary coverage of him as a movie critic (the ohio.com article is a biography).  Power~enwiki (talk) 01:32, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per WP:SNOW. Past AfDs have been littered with the articles of wanna-be celebrities. We are not a webhost for random people nor are we are directory of things on the Internet. We are in fact a charity. Bearian (talk) 13:13, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * P.S. Dear kind closing admin, would you please salt this while you're at it.? Bearian (talk) 13:14, 8 August 2017 (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.