Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funnybros


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Star  Mississippi  16:19, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Funnybros

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Saw this page and wanted to over look it not until almost all the source, possibly all fails to meet Wikipedia independent, reliable and secondary. No point calling him a musician when all the source are from promotion link and also fails in music notability. Since 2023 issue was tagged but no changes.  Gabriel  (talk to me )  00:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians,  and Nigeria.  Gabriel   (talk to me )  00:31, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: Coverage is looking sparse. These two sources might count towards GNG, although they do look low-quality: . I am unable to consistently access guardian.ng. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don’t see how those sources you provided meets GNG neither low quality. Meanwhile, i have never heard the word “Low quality” while determining either an article meets GNG or not. If it passes it passes. If doesn’t pass, it doesn’t. You can visit the article page. Check the tag to understand what reliable, independent source it’s all about. The two source you provided failed to be independent because it doesn’t speak from a disinterest of the article subject.  Gabriel  (talk to me )  04:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * By "low-quality" I meant that the tone is tabloid-style and the articles don't contain a lot of independent analysis. The sources use non-neutral language, but I don't see indications that they have a vested interest in the subject. If the articles were sponsored, for example, they would be completely non-independent, but there is no indication of that (unless there's something I'm missing about the sources). Per WP:IIS, "Independence does not imply even-handedness. An independent source may hold a strongly positive or negative view of a topic or an idea." Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The sources could also be non-independent if the coverage is almost entirely based on the subject's own words, which is possible but not obvious. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I understand u. But before i nominated the page. The sources are not just making sense to me. The few newspaper that was cited was just all about Meet Funnybros. The rest are from Nigerian blogs and music link containing Apple Music and the rest. Personal life he bought a Benz the two source cited are from blogs that are not reliable besides buying a Benz has nothing to do with notability.  Gabriel  (talk to me )  11:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: The article about a comedian that meets WP:GNG. Appearing in independent sources is notable if not presumably. There is a recognition for his skits but I see some unreliable sources, which can be cleaned. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 19:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

* Keep: Aside the facts that the article is poorly sourced in terms of headlines. The references are organically written based on the fact fans appreciate his work, this is a notable comedian in Nigeria. I think the article will be improved over time, I suggest an external link should be added to his article i.e (His official YouTube channel). Madeforall1 (talk) 14:44, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh my God. Please @Madeforall1 AFD discussion is not meant for all editors. Focus on improving yourself here on Wikipedia before jumping into AFD. U have been using the same tone on your talk page to vote keep here. What business does Wikipedia has with his YouTube page. What do you understand by notable on Wikipedia. Just because someone is famous and you know them by that you call them notable here. I will advise you stay off AFD & start practicing how to write a good article.  Gabriel  (talk to me )  15:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I’ve been advise by some admins to participate in AFD, and yes I know when an article is notable or not. I’ve seen cases where external links are added, those links can’t be used as references. Madeforall1 (talk) 15:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * All your articles created since 2022 to 2024 are all deleted and all you could think of was AFD. If anyone could have advise you. Then you definitely have misunderstood them. My last reply to you on this AFD. So don’t bother responding rather take my advice and put that into practice. It’s definitely gonna help you here. Cheers.  Gabriel  (talk to me )  17:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advice Sir. Madeforall1 (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete — fails WP:GNG. Too few reliable, independent sources. A few rather promotional articles on a small number of online news sites are insufficient to establish notability in my opinion. I can see further coverage on Legit.ng, but the articles seem to be very low-quality "entertainment" pieces (one of them being "Look, this YouTuber bought a flashy car!" — c'mon). The majority of the remaining references are very brief: low-effort pieces mostly focused on social media reactions. There seems to be little else available. Coverage is neither significant nor from particularly reliable sources, as best I can tell. WP:NBASIC. GhostOfNoMeme 16:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That is the point. Almost all the source are just talking about what he has acquired. House, Benz and instagram verification has nothing to do with Wikipedia article for creation. Talking about notable outside of Wikipedia to my best of knowledge as a Nigerian ‘he has never trended for anything’ just a popular skit maker I know as well being famous due to his style of video.  Gabriel  (talk to me )  22:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. Articles like "How Female Fan Proposed To Me" and "Skit Maker Funnybros Trends As He Becomes a Mercedes Benz SUV Owner" seem poor references, even if the sources are generally reliable (also, I note the majority of stories about Funnybros on Legit.ng are from the same author; I can't help but wonder if they're paid articles or if there is some connection, but I have no evidence of that). Same goes for "Top 10 Skit Makers To Look Out For In 2023" which is literally just a low-effort listicle in which he's briefly mentioned. I don't think these entertainment fluff pieces are enough to show WP:SIGCOV. I can't find much else on Google beyond these types of articles — and I was mindful to search beyond the English-language sources — that, as Helpful Raccoon noted, are tabloid-style and hardly represent in-depth coverage of the man himself. If this level of referencing were all that is required, I could probably make a thousand Wikipedia articles about various YouTubers who, in reality, are not remotely notable. GhostOfNoMeme 12:07, 16 July 2024 (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.