Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daveyboyz


 * 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) 00:29, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Daveyboyz

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject is a conspiracy theorist YouTuber that fails WP:NBIO, WP:NFRINGE, and WP:GNG. The article is superficially well-referenced, but on closer inspection almost all the references are to Bass's own YouTube videos, interviews with local press or, bizarrely, links to the home pages of publications that the article claims Bass was featured in (but there is no evidence of). Once you filter out those, I can't find any significant independent coverage, just passing mentions in dubious sources (e.g. ). –&#8239;Joe (talk) 09:28, 4 November 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 11:35, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 09:28, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment -- I know nothing of the subject, but I do not think "conspiracy theorist" is correct. Nevertheless most of the content seems utterly trivial.  He has appeared a few times on TV and in other contexts, in one case dealing with a controversial subject (the whereabouts of Sodom).  I am not sure whether the right solution is deletion or to remove the trivia and see what is left.  I note that the vast majority of the edits are by unlogged-in users or SPA.  I suspect this results from COI.  If the subject wants all the trivia of his public life on the web, he should use his own webpage for it.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:03, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * FWIW I started to try to trim the trivia and poorly sourced material, then gave up and brought it here when it became clear I was removing everything. "Conspiracy theorist" was in the lead until recently and is based on stuff like this: . –&#8239;Joe (talk) 15:34, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - despite the absurd number of references, none appear to meet WP:GNG. Kind of impressive, really. PianoDan (talk) 18:20, 12 November 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.