Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Strickland (blogger)


 * 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 merge to Don't Shoot Portland. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 14:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Michael Strickland (blogger)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a case where the WP:BLP1E policy applies. The subject is a YouTuber notable only for having pulled a gun on a group of protesters in 2016 and subsequently convicted of crimes relating to this event. Reliable sources have only significantly discussed the subject in relation to this event, the subject's YouTube endeavors are not otherwise notable, and ultimately the event does not appear to have any historical significance. Mz7 (talk) 15:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Mz7 (talk) 15:54, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Mz7 (talk) 15:54, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  16:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete non notable --Devokewater @  20:58, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge to Don't Shoot Portland, or keep pending merge into other appropriate topic. WP:BLP1E can't be applied here because the subject fails the 2nd criterion, to be low-profile. As explained at WP:PUBLICFIGURE and Who is a low-profile individual, he has worked to self-promote, and actively maintains a public profile with a YouTube channel with thousands of subscribers. An argument to delete needs to rest on a broader guideline, rather than one so narrowly defined and specific as BLP1E. WP:SUSTAINED is probably the safest ground: it appears coverage all but ceased after 2016, only getting brief mention in 2019 and 2020 of the conviction appeal. By that guideline the topic should be upmerged to be placed into a broader context, such as into the stub Don't Shoot Portland, aiming for an article with a lot more content about Don't Shoot Portland along with the major the highlights of the Strickland case. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think your points are reasonable, particularly your point about WP:SUSTAINED and how this individual may no longer be considered low-profile as a result of his YouTube channel. To expand on my deletion nomination in light of this, the relevant notability guidelines here are WP:CRIME and WP:ARTIST. The subject of this article clearly has no broader historical significance for either his crime or his YouTube work, and there is a scarcity of coverage of his endeavors outside of the 2016 coverage of his crime. For these reasons, the subject is not notable. I am unopposed to merging some information into the Don't Shoot Portland, but it seems that article is currently a one-line stub, and we should be wary of placing undue weight onto Strickland in that article. Mz7 (talk) 22:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. I thought Strickland might become/stay newsworthy but it was 1E. I think Bratland is right, it's worth a single sentence. The fact Don't Shoot is very short is its own problem- perhaps it should be merged to something else. But speaking of Strickland and a single event, it seems appropriate for Don't Shoot. I'm not opposed to a snowball close on this AFD. tedder (talk) 00:03, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Don't Shoot Portland: Per reasons above. ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 09:30, 10 August 2020 (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.