Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Miller (Internet celebrity) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Tone 16:46, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Greg Miller (Internet celebrity)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A lot of content based on a lot of self-produced triviality. The sourcing is rather atrocious and comes nowhere near establishing the independent notability of this "internet personality". Previous AfD seems to have coasted through on a lot of vague "but he's famous!" comments. As previously suggested, this should be redirected to Kinda Funny, which at least got a reasonable amount of secondary, non-promotional coverage. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:47, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:20, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. There were a bunch of spurious keep !votes last AfD, but the rest of keeps (including mine) argue that the person passes WP:GNG with multiple reliable independent in-depth sources, such as WP:VG/RS. Copying the same sources I pasted last time:  (lesser, not on list ). And a new one since: . The article doesn't have these sources, but that's an editing problem. —  HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 17:21, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. —  HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 17:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep as WP:DINC. His leaving IGN has spawned a number of articles about him specifically such as Polygon Daily Dot Missourian ten eighty Venture Beat Goliath/Concourse media AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:49, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Three years since last nom, and references still don't support notability. You'd think with such enthusiastic Keep voters, something would have been found since then. / edg ☺ ☭ 21:06, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * When you say the references don’t support notability do you mean that you don’t believe any of the sources to be reliable sources, the coverage is trivial or some other isssue with the sourced that the keep voters have presented?--76.65.40.44 (talk) 03:08, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , have you seen the nine reliable sources came up with?  soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:29, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Like Hellknowz pointed out, there are several, independent reliabe sources to be found on Miller. WP:BEFORE and WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP applies. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:29, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - Article does need updates but AfD shouldn't used for cleaning up articles. Many sources on article and above to prove independent notability. Matt14451 (talk) 09:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - While the article does need to be curated so it will be of a better quality, this person has demonstrated to meet WP:GNG requirements, as listed by other users with their sources above. While, as I previously stated, the article needs curation, not deletion. Cabbott14 (talk) 13:08, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, you've got a brand new account and your first (and so far only) edit is this !keep vote. This might come off as strange. You could of course have been editing for years under a different account, but it is a bit off. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:43, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I assume they are the IP from above given the "as I previously stated" comment. — HELL KNOWZ   ▎TALK 19:09, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Possible, especially since the IP didn't vote. It seems the "as I previously stated" comment refers to the first part of his vote which also refers to curation. Matt14451 (talk) 19:14, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Unless there is a second IP I’m missing I did not make the keep vote.--76.65.40.44 (talk) 20:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Exactly, that was I was thinking too. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:38, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The new account is likely due to this AFD being advertised off-site, and upon coming up to it, other readers have created an account to !vote on the AFD. --  Alex TW 22:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - the article needs to be trimmed and has a lot of excessive detail, however, it seems to pass the GNG based on extant and observed sourcing Chetsford (talk) 01:01, 20 October 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.