Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Durchholz


 * 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. Tone 07:38, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Eric Durchholz

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable author. Juneau Mike (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:33, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:33, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - non-notable YouTuber/author/mystic. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Kirbanzo (talk) 18:09, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is some coverage out there for Durchholz, however the bulk of it is local, which is greatly depreciated on Wikipedia at best because papers are more likely to cover a local person or event. I don't always agree with the idea that it shouldn't be used at all, but I don't think it should make up the bulk or entirety of what's out there. The only source that isn't local is Ancestry.com, which in general shouldn't be used as a source because so much of its content is user submitted. He has been mentioned in this Peter Lang book, but I don't know that this is really enough to justify inclusion. A prior version of the article asserts that he was interviewed on the Starz network, but the only source for this is a primary one that doesn't really state what type of interview it was, if it aired, and so on. Also, while this in itself isn't a reason to delete the article, I'll also note that the article has been the focus of vandalism, possibly as a result of his Encyclopedia Dramatica page. Being a target for vandalism isn't in itself a reason for deletion, but given that the notability here is tentative at best, I'd argue that it would be kinder to just delete the article so that it (and Durchholz) is less of a target. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡)  00:42, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I also want to note that I removed an Amazon link from the article, as it's generally not needed to prove the claims that he's an author given the other sourcing in the article. I also view e-commerce sites as inherently problematic as a source because it often comes across as promotional, even if this isn't the intent of adding the source. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡)  00:45, 25 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Not a notable subject as an individual. Fails WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:58, 26 September 2018 (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.