Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Gettys


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 02:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Tim Gettys

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This individual does not appear to be notable - I have not been able to find any reliable sources discussing him (most sources that mention him focus on the two more notable members of Kinda Funny).

Also nominating for the same reason. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC)


 * As video producers, every reliable source has been in video form for them over the past decade. The two more notable Kinda Funny members are focused on more because those two are more well known and all four of them started a company forever. If Kanye West, Taylor Swift, Danny Pudi, and Gillian Jacobs were to start a business together theoretically, of course you're going to have more articles focused on West and Swift. That doesn't make Pudi and Jacobs insignificant, it just means West and Swift are more well known.
 * Currently all that is written for them is about their new business that is barely a year old. They still have years worth of information about their involvement at IGN to be added. Creating these articles takes a lot of time and effort so having these pages fully fleshed out will be a little while. Would have taken less time if it wasn't taken down in the first place. The point is that the information listed is all valid and has been checked directly by the source. Taking it down just causes there to be less information on here. The pages do have to be filled in more but there is nothing inaccurate about them. You google their names and they'll be all that comes up. When someone searches for those names online that's what they want to find, these articles are just another, simpler way of finding more information about them.
 * Cameronken (talk) 13:58, 13 October 2015 (UTC) — Cameronken (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment This is a walled garden in the making around the new venture Kinda Funny which also seems to have problems (all the references are primary) making it a case for a Db-promo. Far better to include these people in that article perhaps with Redirects.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete both as per nominator.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:39, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related page because it is the source page of the two pages under consideration and itself does not appear notable. It is a new entity that does not appear to have garnered the coverage to demonstrate notability:

Peter Rehse (talk) 10:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as I'm not seeing any convincing improvement. SwisterTwister   talk  04:43, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete all - nothing in the searches meet the in-depth coverage from independent sources needed for to meet the notability criteria.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:34, 22 October 2015 (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.