Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ray Narvaez, Jr.


 * 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. Perhaps also redirect, but that's an editorial decision.  Sandstein  08:39, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Ray Narvaez, Jr.

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be known for one event. See WP:BLP1E. No real encyclopedic value. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:55, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 18:09, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 18:09, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete or Protected redirect - I am the editor that previously proposed this artical for deletion, it was was contested by . This article does not meet Biographies of living persons. The First two reference is about Ray Narvaez, Jr. leaving the company Rooster Teeth to steam games via Twitch. The third is about Twitch and asks him about how people make money on the website. It is more generalized about making money not about Ray Narvaez, Jr. himself. I support either this article being deleted or Redirected with protection from recreation to Rooster Teeth.Kyle1278 (talk) (Ctb) (log) 00:25, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Popularity (or income, the 20,000 pay for first Twitch broadcast is rather odd) is not enough to have an article. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment in support of keeping. First of all, to address a misconception brought up by, popularity actually does confer notability for entertainers, to a degree. See WP:ENT, which states "2. Has a large fan base or a significant 'cult' following." shows likely notability. Keep in mind that a lot of the sources likely to discuss Mr. Narvaez are primarily online publications, which have a quick decay in terms of search engine findings. Here's several sources that seem to either meet or come very close to meeting GNG, in my opinion:   (first three are the ones presently in the article), , , , , . Given the assumption of notability provided by WP:ENT based on a clear "cult following" as well as the above evidence suggesting GNG is possible to meet, especially if I had access to local offline sources, I believe this should be kept. I'm not directly placing a keep vote myself because I happen to be a fan, but I encourage other editors to consider the sources I've supplied and the entertainer notability guidelines. Pinging  and  to ensure they see the entertainer guideline. ~ RobTalk 15:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have to disagree,, to me that seems like a WP:ITSPOPULAR-reading of WP:ENT. Narvaez, Jr.'s popularity still needs to be proven by reliable sources, which WP:VG/RS do not. Using the custom Google search engine, I got one result using his real name, while the monniker "BrownMan" just mention him in passing. The other day I found articles announcing a video game that was cancelled from eleven years ago, so I don't see understand why you would think "quick decay" is an issue. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:39, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Using the video game custom search is a bit odd, since Ray Narvaez isn't a video game or a developer. He's an entertainer, and will be featured primarily on entertainment news sites, not video game sites. Playing video games as entertainment generally doesn't result in coverage on video game media, with the sometimes exception of competitive e-sports. I've supplied sources above that clearly show he has received coverage in entertainment, and sources that support his Twitch earnings clearly show he's popular in a non-subjective way. Note that WP:ITSPOPULAR specifically decries time-bound fame, not actual national or international fame, which the sources regarding viewership and donations clearly support Ray Narvaez having. Where sources support national or international fame, that absolutely can show notability because of the sources themselves establishing it. We get into trouble when we start thinking "I know he's famous, ergo he's notable", but that's not what's happening here. ~ RobTalk 15:47, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * , why would that be odd? WP/VG covers more than video games and video game developers alone, and so do the sources used. If I look up YouTube personality PewDiePie, I get over 3 million hits. There's an entire article on Twitch Plays Pokémon. So Let's Play and game streaming videos get plenty of coverage. Regardless, Narvaez worked with Rooster Teeth on the Achievement Hunter division and currently makes Twitch.tv streaming videos. Those are all very much related to video games, yet Narvaez isn't mentioned in WP:VG/RS. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 17:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That doesn't change the fact that he has reliable coverage in entertainment. VG/RS is a great tool to establish notability quickly for things very directly related to video games, but it does not establish lack of notability where reliable sources outside of their filters provide coverage. ~ RobTalk 17:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with Soetermans, WP:ITSPOPULAR the only two things he has been popular for is leaving Achievement Hunter and Twitch stream that made $20,000. They are non notable popular events but not notable for the over all article. I have read VG/RS several times before he does not meet the guideline, VG/RS for notability of a person you need to follow the guidelines for people not video game sourcing. When it comes to Biographies of living persons, WP:GNG. Kyle1278 (talk) (Ctb) (log) 19:52, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Also "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." he does not meet this, the Achievement Hunter article already covers his leave mining it into this article is redundant."Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following." He has had a following from joining Achievement hunter, most that watch him now come from that following. So you would need a source showing the following back to when ray was still employed by them. "Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." Note that its plural, he has not made any notable changes, earning money on twitch would just automatically file it under WP:ITSPOPULAR or WP:NOTNEWS he is know from Achievement Hunter. So a mention of him leaving Achievement Hunter belongs on the Achievement hunter page not a separate article. As you can see it's all is all about Achievement hunter fans. As well he fall onto WP:BLP2E which is the twitch stream, leaving a company is not notable when he has gains fans for working with AH, not leaving. Kyle1278 (talk) (Ctb) (log) 13:31, 22 February 2016‎ (UTC)


 * First, I'd like to note that WP:ITSPOPULAR is an essay with no standing other than being an opinion of the editor that wrote it. Having said that, I fully agree with the essay. The differences between an "It's popular" argument and an "It's achieved a large following/cult status" argument is that the latter is backed up by actual facts in reliable sources. It's a reliably sourced fact that Mr. Narvaez has a large following. WP:ENT is a specific notability guideline. WP:GNG must be met, yes, but it's general practice that you assume notability when specific notability criteria have been met unless there is a very good reason to believe it's not notable. You only need to meet a single one of the listed criteria to be "likely notable". The criteria I've focused on is only "Has a large fan base or a significant cult following". Your argument suggesting that the following isn't proven to exist if I can't show it's source reliably is suspect; the criteria only requires the existence of a large following, not an origin story. Whatever the origin of the following, he now has a large cult following on work independent of RoosterTeeth, as evidence by his Twitch viewership and donations. And I don't believe anyone has addressed my effort to show he actually does meet GNG. I provided eight sources that discuss him, his following, and his work. Many center around his leaving RoosterTeeth, but not all of them, by any means, so this isn't a simple case of BLP1E. ~ RobTalk 23:49, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand where you coming from, but only a note worthy one time event does not meet WP:GNG. An event must receive significant or in-depth coverage to be notable. People known only in connection with one event should generally not have an article written about them. If the event is notable, then an article usually should be written about the event instead. The event of "$20,000 from Twitch does not meet notability guideline for Notability (events). Under other circumstances People known only in connection with one event should generally not have an article written about them. If the event is notable, then an article usually should be written about the event instead.  WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTNEWS are in play here. He meets one criteria of one WP:ENT, this does not mean that an article can be based entirely off that point, let alone a event with little coverage. Soured info that lack WP:ENT. Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.WP:RS WP:NEWSORG With news media, and BLP the references have to be proved reliably. The one's you stated above about him leaving should be mentioned Achievement hunter. The web animation is part of rooster Teeth and should be added to the section X-Ray and Vav, since it is more broad about the web animation and talks abouts it's debut at the convention RTX (event) in 2014, it mentions both Gavin Free and Ray Narvaez, Jr. being voice actors. the a references to Tubefilter which is questionable as WP:RS. Both the Austin Chronicle and vavel references are not about Ray himself. The Chronicle only mentions him in a image, while vacel(very bad for WP:RS) mentions him helping the return of to the machinima series The Stranger Hood which should be posted on the Rooster Teeth article like X-Ray and Vav. It was a stretch goal for the moive Lazer Team announced by Burnie Burns. As well TwitchCon should be mentioned on the Twitch.tv articular. The articles that actually cover a major event for him fall into WP:BLP1E, it is not a long lasting event nor globally significant. This information would be better used on the other articles due to the lack of notability for a Person. Kyle1278 (talk) (Ctb) (log) 06:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect if needed because none of this establishes solid independent notability for his own article. SwisterTwister   talk  02:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) {{#tag:ref|19:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

 {{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
 * Keep-ish I feel like there is enough notability, although the article doesn't do a very good job of representing it... I can see arguments both ways here however, I knew on creation this would be very borderline. EoRdE6{{sup| (Come Talk to Me!) }} 20:26, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 19:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions.  czar  04:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

 {{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  {{sup| talk }} 02:32, 8 March 2016 (UTC) {{clear}}
 * I would like to note that my long comment/discussion above in support of keeping this article should not be weighed as an editor supporting a keep without considering my stated partiality regarding this subject. While I think my arguments are good (as I usually do), if no-one else has found them convincing, there is almost certainly consensus to delete here. A close as no consensus based solely on my previous comment would be inappropriate in light of my bias, in my opinion. ~ RobTalk 19:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Rooster Teeth, where there can be a brief bio/description. It's clear from the sources used that Narvaez's notability derives from Rooster Teeth (mostly mentions in articles about the company) and only appropriate that his own bio article would expand out when (reliable) sources begin to cover him on his own. Right now there's the announcement that he's leaving and his use as an example in PopSci—it's just shy of significant coverage for his own article. Eventually, perhaps, but not now. (Not crazy about the reliability/applicability of the other sources listed above.) czar  15:02, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete due to even the allegation of notability. Not all Internet celebs are automatically notable. If better sources were found, there could be an argument for general notability, but I'm not getting it. Bearian (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2016 (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.