Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandoz (Youtuber)


 * 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. Tone 12:34, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Sandoz (Youtuber)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable YouTuber and doesn't have links with other articles. Abishe (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Abishe (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Abishe (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Abishe (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete fails WP:GNG KingSkyLord (talk &#124; contribs) 03:51, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep the mentioned has 147k subscribers at this moment, I believe this makes the channel somewhat relevant, it is a stub but it can Be worked on. Dellwood546 (talk)
 * Keep There are more than 147,000 users who follow his youtube page, which is a recognized influencer on the Internet. In addition, many renowned sites relay its investigations .He was interviewed by serious sites. The person is in adequacy with the criteria of notoriety in force on Wikipedia. It has its place on Wikipedia.-Susanowoo (talk) 23:30, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * "Has many Youtube subscribers" is not an assertion of notability, because (like 'has many Twitter followers') it's way too easy to game. Am I saying that Sandoz bought tens of thousands of fake subscribers, no. But it can be done, and as such it does not show notability. Remember Goodhart's law. DS (talk) 06:14, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: Cannot find any significant coverage from reliable sources that indicate subject passes WP:GNG. Amount of followers doesn't indicate notability, only indepentant, non-primary coverage. Of the sources, #1 is just analytics, #2 is Primary, #3 looks like a blog post, #4 is Primary, #5 will not load for me, #6-8 is not about the subject, #9 is primary. -- Darth Mike (talk) 15:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - Nahal (T) 09:36, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per 's source analysis, he doesn't appear to satisfy the web, biographical or general notability guidelines. I'd like to also take this opportunity to yet again restate one of the fundamental truths of Wikipedia: a subscriber, follower, like or view count does not endow someone with notability.    SITH   (talk)   15:03, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * delete per Darth Mike, and Sith (StraussInTheHouse). Combinedly, they've said what I was going to say. Amount of followers is not an indication of notability (followers can be purchased), the subject doesnt have significant coverage, and thus fails general notability guidelines. —usernamekiran(talk) 02:55, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * delete fails the WP:GNG guideline for talent/authors. Graywalls (talk) 06:55, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. as per .- Nahal (T) 11:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. 147,000 followers makes one famous but not notable, which requires significant coverage in reliable sources, which is missing badly here. Bearian (talk) 16:16, 3 December 2019 (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.