Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinay kuyya(channel)


 * 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 09:14, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Vinay kuyya(channel)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:WEB. Non-notable YouTube channel, lacks significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. GSS (talk |c|em ) 14:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 14:03, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:11, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

It is having significant coverage about the channel and the sources are from notable news sites like times of india and deccan chronicle. Instead of deleting tag you can add artical improving tag.Iamheentity (talk)  User:GSS
 * Delete - an interesting case, but I'm opting for a delete vote. The channel has accrued coverage in WP:RS, but this coverage (including the Times source, which is filed under a Hyderabad News tab) is strictly regional in regards to Hyderabad. One source (the Deccan Chronicle) is also not independent as it is based around an interview with one of the interviewers. This being said, I think WP:INDISCRIMINATE should be applied here, as the channel only has 87,000 subscribers (TOI source says 63,000) and 20 videos (according to Mirichi9). This is a trivial amount by YouTube standards; as an editor who has created three articles about YouTube channels, the least subscribed to channel I wrote about (that of Jesse Cox (YouTuber)) has 963,000 subscribers, and he is considered a small to medium sized channel when compared to his contemporaries. In short, I feel it is subject that is not notable enough for an encyclopedia despite its reliable-yet-regional coverage.--SamHolt6 (talk) 16:34, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete-We are an encyclopedia.And, per nom. &#x222F; WBG converse 05:49, 17 September 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.