Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YTCracker (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Keep; WP:SNOW + consensus — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 02:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

YTCracker
This is a renomination. The original nomination was:
 * Seems to be a vanity page of a mostly non-notable person. Schnee (cheeks clone) 01:08, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

The current nomination is by User:Kintetsubuffalo (talk • contribs), and was made somewhat incorrectly. Note that some of the comments here were copied from the original deletion discussion page. (I have no personal position in the discussion - I'm just trying to clarify the situation here.) Zetawoof(&zeta;) 09:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * the page should be deleted as per the fact that many of the above votes are unsigned by verifiable users, and that the subject of the article edits the article himself, which is in poor form, as per the longterm discussion at Jimbo Wales Chris 00:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. Before the unsigned votes, there were three "legitimate" keep votes based on true assertions about the artist's notability and compatability with WP:MUSIC versus zero delete votes. It is too soon to renominate an article based solely on the fact that it is in poor form -- that is a cause to edit, not delete. SliceNYC 01:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Three weeks shy of a year is hardly too soon, and plenty enough time to clean this article up of POV and self-glorification. Chris 01:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * A misunderstanding -- I was reading the AfD log quickly and just assumed it was recent, not from 2005. However, the fact that no delete votes were made and the artist is well-known and has many Google results is still germane, and my vote to keep stands. SliceNYC 01:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Never heard of him myself, but he appears to have enough coverage to pass WP:BIO. GassyGuy 01:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Abstain i personally haven't peppered any of this stuff up to read like an ad, so anything done in that fashion would not be my intention. to avoid autobiographical conflict, i have only edited personal factual information, such as my divorce, per Autobiography.  any kind of independent verification of the facts presented in this article have come out in some third party interview or format, some discussed at length on the previous vfd talkpage.  if anything is needed from the horse's mouth to adhere to formatting concerns, let me know. Ytcracker 03:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but rewrite for encyclopedic tone and remove a lot of the less notable personal stuff. I think notability and importance are established but that doesn't make everything he's ever done notable (or interesting). --Dhartung | Talk 07:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Echo GassyGuy's comment.  The only thing that jumped out at me was "YTCracker" being used thirteen times in the article.  Pronouns are perfectly reasonable.  I'll take care of that right now.  SWAdair 08:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Please note that I have relocated new comments from Articles for deletion/YTCracker  to this new discussion page, as is standard practice when relisting a previously nominated article for deletion.  Yamaguchi先生 08:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above comments, this figure has coverage enough to meet WP:BIO guidelines. Yamaguchi先生 08:30, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: It's a clear case: no record contract, "Internet personality," no sales: fails WP:MUSIC.  Beware that "Internet personality" means us, so expect sockpuppets, nonce accounts, and passionate argument that's irrelevant.  Geogre 10:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep perGassyGuy's suggestions and also per Dhartung and meeting WP:BIO LemonIce 12:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but tag for cleanup. Subject has a plethora of multiple, independent sources cited asserting media coverage and notability. Article is neither WP:VAIN nor WP:NN. Fails nomination to delete. Keep. Scorpiondollprincess 13:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep: YT has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works.  Even if we discount the ones that feature his cracking, there are still a few about his music.  It's a close call, but I think he meets the musician notability standards.  TheronJ 14:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep & cleanup. Themindset 17:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * keep please this internet personality is notable passes bio guideline Yuckfoo 23:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per above. Dionyseus 01:17, 2 August 2006 (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.