Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Pluta


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 07:27, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Paul Pluta

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A big-headed YouTuber who isn't known for much more than that - claims to be some sort of celebrity, but I don't see how this meets notability guidelines. Should have been deleted the first time around.  4TheWynne (talk) (contribs)  00:02, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:09, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:09, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

There are many credible sources of information that reference this individual. http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-rail-transport-minister-stirling-hinchliffe-warned-about-driver-shortage-in-early-march/news-story/f2d36dfdfc14daf778aee62d007ecf30

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/queensland-rail-fiasco-who-is-brisbanes-rail-advocate-paul-pluta-20161229-gtjhrm.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiromi kirishima (talk • contribs) 00:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

This guy is exceedingly well known in the Watch community and also within Australia. Love him or hate him...he is definitely a celebrity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.3.93.130 (talk) 01:29, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

This guy has had millions of views on YouTube, has been a guest commentator on television networks, and is well known in the watch community. His page should not be deleted. There are much lesser known people on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.248.176.18 (talk) 02:37, 10 November 2017 (UTC)


 * You will need a bunch of credible sources to prove these claims. Additionally (and less to the point), to other editors viewing this, I think that the above comments are cases of block evasion, as the article's creator (who is arguing for it to be kept) has since been blocked.  4TheWynne (talk) (contribs)  03:00, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

SupportReading through these comments and looking at the page, I'm in support of deletion as it is not meeting notability criterion. Regarding the comments in support, these are from random IP addresses and possibly could be the person in question from different devices. In addition, the contributions related to this person on other pages (e.g. Queensland Rail which has had a minor edit war in recent days) contravene many WP policies and may also be from this person.James.au (talk) 00:04, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 01:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

I digress to the deletion of Paul Pluta's wikipedia page.His page does not qualify to be deleted since it never fulfilled reasons for deletion.Additionally, he's famous and his fanbase spans across the world.From the U.S all the way to Australia.


 * Tagging – the above comments (minus James.au's support comment) have all been made by the same person. All have only one edit to their name (other than the user that you already blocked) – clear block evasion as I mentioned before.   4TheWynne (talk) (contribs)  03:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete The coverage is an interview or two and mentions. Fails WP:NBIO. 40000 subscribers doesn't bode well for notability either. Galobtter (talk) 18:06, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kagundu  Talk To Me  01:41, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete largely per nom and Galobtter. I was going to say that he made it as a sort of "15 minutes of fame" case here in Brisbane himself (where I'm from, and where the article talks about his predictions about the public transport issues this time last year), but he didn't even do that. Simply non-notable, and none of the sources available elevate him beyond that position. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 03:35, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:CREATIVE criterion #1 ("The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers"). For example:
 * https://www.ablogtowatch.com/archie-luxury-ablogtowatch-interview-paul-pluta/
 * https://www.google.com/search?q=archieluxury+site%3Arolexforums.com
 * https://www.google.com/search?q=archieluxury+site%3Awatchuseek.com
 * http://www.wristtimes.com/blog-1/2014/6/4/wrist-time-profile-archie-luxury-the-beast-of-brisbane
 * https://www.google.com/search?q=archieluxury+site%3A4chan.org
 * https://www.google.com/search?q=archieluxury+site%3Af169bbs.org
 * https://www.google.com/search?q=archieluxury+site%3Areddit.com
 * Appearance on The Project (New Zealand TV programme):
 * http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2017/02/viral-video-star-archie-luxury-laments-the-warm-clothing-of-nz-women.html
 * http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2017/02/is-archie-luxury-right-about-auckland-being-a-ripoff.html
 * Kim Komando show uses video clip of Pluta arranging his luxury luggage
 * Appearance on the Debonair Fox Show
 * Racehorse named after Pluta's YouTube personality
 * -- DanielPenfield (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment on above Keep vote I disagree that these sites establish notability through WP:Creative. I cannot justify how any of the 4 creativity criterion are met.James.au (talk) 05:50, 19 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete does not meet the notability guidelines for creative artists.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:22, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Unique name makes searching easy, but he fails WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:27, 26 November 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.