Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Newton


 * 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. Drmies (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Lee Newton

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This subject lacks notability (WP:BIO) &mdash;Danorton (talk) 22:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep "Lacking notability"? Really? That is the reason why she is a host on a channel that has over 400 THOUSAND subscribers, and 91 MILLION video views. Every video has over 100 thousand views (except ones that have been recently uploaded). Also she has been featured on Huffington Post on an article she covered. If this article does get deleted, I suggest making Philip DeFranco its stand alone article and merging this one with that. Soulboost (talk) 01:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and thanks for nominating, I've been thinking of doing so for a while. That the Youtube channel is (possibly) notable does not mean that all hosts are automatically notable. (The article of another cohost for the channel was recently deleted in AfD.) The only source hinting at any kind of notability for this person in the Huffington Post one, and one source doesn't constitute significant coverage. --bonadea contributions talk 05:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 08:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 08:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Note Actually, being a host on a POPULAR web news show that earns thousands and millons views on 5 stories (Mon-Thur) is notable. 4-7 million weekly from Mon-Thursday news videos the Friday Comment Commentary, the saturday & sunday videos (Curb Cash, Bloopers, Behind the Scenes) and the One on One videos. Just go to these stats websites for the staggering numbers.  Also if you try to argue that its the show SourceFed and not Lee Newton than just realize that Lee Newton is a HOST on SourceFed and has 400-600k people watching her from Mon-Thurs. And if this page is deleted which it shouldn't, then get the SourceFed coverage from Wikipedia, make into its own article since it has enough refs and whatnot and merge this with that, as I previously stated.


 * "being a host on a POPULAR web news show [...] is notable"  Please show the policy that supports this assertion?  We're not talking about the dictionary definition of "notable", but about Wikipedia's definition which is pretty narrowly defined.  I know this can seem like pointless hoop-jumping, but them's the rules, and though rules can be changed, until they are changed they need to be applied.  And as a matter of fact I'm not arguing that the show is notable, either. Here's some good info about notability for web content.  --bonadea contributions talk 19:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Note this is in wikipedias criteria for entertainers WP:ENT - Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and celebrities: -- Im pretty sure that Newton fits into the entertainers as she is a youtube celebrity and she fits into the second because she has a large fanbase. If you watch a couple of the Comment Commentary there are tons of fans sending her and her co-hosts things. Threre are several comments that mention Lee. Just to prove how big a fanbase they have is that they made Lee one of the most popular write-in candidates on Maxim Hot 100. Again, if the article is deleted at least give SourceFed its own article and merge this with that as I stated before. Soulboost (talk) 01:37, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
 * Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
 * Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment
 * Please provide some third party reliable sources to backup your claims above. Things such as stat pages, youtube profiles or your original research (lots of which you've provided in this AFD) are not these. Currently only the only ones in the article that qualify are Huffingtonpost and maxium, I can't find her on the askmen list. One is trivial coverage from a user based vote, and the other is about a show she is in (not about her), and both mention the show has a fanbase, not her. So currently fails all applicable notability policies (WP:GNG+WP:ENTERTAINER. Also applicable here is WP:INHERITED.--Otterathome (talk) 11:59, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * IMO the Maxim ref is a trivial mention (even though it's in a reliable source). --bonadea contributions talk 07:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Maxim has named her #57 on there top 100, since they recognize her, and I'm not saying Maxim's a great literary read, after being in print some 15 plus years because of a large following I think she meets, or shortly will meet wikipedias' standards for entertainers. Yes the article can use work, perhaps could be tagged as a stub for now but should be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peacekeeper 1234 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * So because she came #57 in a public vote on a mens magazine website because her friends told people to vote her, and she's going to be popular soon, she's notable? What a terrible argument that doesn't address the problem and is using a crystal ball.--Otterathome (talk) 21:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep based on sources now in the article and above arguments.   Th e S te ve   11:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep based on above arguments, notability of the person is question is defensible.user: ter890 talk~ter890~ 17:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: I have closed this as "keep" earlier, but reversed the closure as it seemed to be controversial. → B  music  ian  22:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I would encourage !voters to take a look at the sources and form their own opinion on whether the existing sources actually meet WP:RS or not, and whether there is significant coverage in reliable independent sources. I still feel that there isn't such coverage, per my own and Otterathome's comments above. --bonadea contributions talk 08:21, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with bonadea that the existing sources aren't good enough. In addition I checked HighBeam Research, a search engine for 6,500 contemporary publications such as newspapers and magazines. Any person or concept of any recent notability would be likely to have some sort of mention in this huge resource. But a search for <"lee newton" youtube> or <"lee newton" sourcefed> throws up nothing. This is sheer WP:RECENTISM. —S MALL  JIM   12:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep because of her being on maxim hot 100 list. that is notable to be in a widely published magazine. Angletests (talk) 15:36, 31 May 2012 (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.