Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unkle Adams


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:10, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Unkle Adams

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Currently very poorly sourced article consisting entirely of non-rs sources, primary sources, and short blurbs. Searches turned up some hits, but all were either short blurbs or were from non-reliable sources. In addition, the somewhat longer blurbs all dealt with the single dust-up between this individual and a youtube personality, so WP:BIO1E might apply, but I think the greater policy would simply be WP:GNG, since there is not enough in-depth coverage from reliable, independent sources to show that he passes.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:50, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:50, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:51, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:51, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:55, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete a non-notable motivational speaker/Youtube personality. The Newsday coverage is WP:MILL news coverage of appearances, and doesn't discuss him in detail in any way.  power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 04:06, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. YouTubers are not handed an automatic notability freebie just because their own or other people's self-published and user-generated YouTube videos technically metaverify that they exist — a YouTuber has to receive reliable source coverage, in sources independent of their own self-created content, to clear our notability standards. But there's not even close to enough reliable source coverage being shown here. Bearcat (talk) 23:23, 14 March 2018 (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.