Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Chariton


 * 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. Mackensen (talk) 14:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Jordan Chariton

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable subject has been tagged with notability tag since July 2016. Currently has three references mostly from trade publications. Claims that subject has had positions at foxnews and others are likely just self-written bio information probably written by subject himself. Would need independent references to claim  holding positions at said news outlets. Nevertheless, notability is not inherited from any news organization that he might or might not have contributed to. Fails WP:GNG. Antonioatrylia (talk) 17:50, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:30, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:30, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I have concerns here that media journalists who are associated with non-MSM are facing a bias because the sources that we count as notable are main-stream. And the point that notability is not drawn from the news organisation you belong to is debatable. As an viewer external to the American situation, I feel that this point needs to be debated. In a modern world, notability needs to take into account the whole picture. AshLin (talk) 07:09, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - Not notable. I've read the comment by and agree in principle, but Chariton still needs to go.--  Jim in Georgia  Contribs  Talk  01:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree the subject lacks notability- and that reliable sources do not seem to exist in any form that cover him as himself rather than through the stories he is running: . There is no persistence or depth of coverage of him in independent sources. Fails WP:ANYBIO, with certainly no prejudice at against 's cremarks touching on possible WP:BIAS; I agree that's a deabate that most certainly needs to be had. &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  15:29, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, under condition As long as this article can be properly and independently sourced, I believe Jordan Chariton maintains the required notability. As the main individual on TYT Politics, he has a large audience online. HeathIsling (22:13 GMT, 29th April 2017) —Preceding undated comment added 21:14, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is an encyclopedia built around reliable source coverage. There is not enough coverage of Chariton, and so no justification for an article on him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:40, 30 April 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.