Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DeepFuckingValue

DeepFuckingValue

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

DeepFuckingValue (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject is a living person known primarily for a single event, the GameStop short squeeze. WP:BLP1E applies. — BarrelProof (talk) 19:28, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

• Keep - WP:BLP1E does not apply since points 2 and 3 are not met. Their role in the event is very well-documented, and they are not likely to remain low-profile otherwise. Per WP:LOWPROFILE, "A low-profile individual is someone who has been covered in reliable sources without seeking such attention, often as part of their connection with a single event. Persons who actively seek out media attention are not low-profile, regardless of whether or not they are notable." DeepFuckingValue sought out interviews with media, making them fail this criteria and BLP1E. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 19:32, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. There's enough info here that it makes sense to split it off from the main article. It could be merged, but that wouldn't be ideal. It's more than just a passing mention. Benjamin (talk) 19:37, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep - #3 "If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented." Event is significant and the individual's role is substantial and well-documented. UserTwoSix (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep: per Elliot, seems to satisfy WP:BLP and WP:GNG as this person has seen much media coverage. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 19:40, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 22:40, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

• Redirect to GameStop short squeeze per WP:CRYSTALBALL. We can't know right now whether or not Gill will have sustained coverage in the press (WP:1E) or whether or not he will remain low-profile (WP:BLP1E). I also disagree with the idea that he sought out media; from every indication, it seems to have happened the other way around. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 03:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. Reuters doxxed someone, and then everyone else wrote about the doxxing. 64.246.153.97 (talk) 04:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• Reuters did not dox anyone. He gave an interview. He runs a YouTube channel that makes his personality, his likeness, and his portfolio known. He has made no attempts to stay low-profile. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 12:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• Keep per Elliot321. This is WP:NOTBLP1E. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 05:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as per other comments, not all requirements are met for 1 event, nor is the event insignificant. However I would suggest renaming, as his coverage uses often uses his real name, not just his reddit or other social (YouTube etc) usernames. This article is named after the reddit user, but his notability is not specific only to that. DrGvago (talk) 13:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect to GameStop short squeeze per our general guidelines on one event notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:00, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

  Comment: You have !voted in four AfDs in less than two minutes. I find it extremely unlikely that you have even bothered to read the article, let alone check its sources. jp×g 17:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

  You could give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they just clicked publish in less that two minutes. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

  Perhaps Johnpacklambert could clarify for us. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 00:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

  You should not throw personal attacks at people who !vote against an article you created on an AfD discussion.--JBchrch (talk) 19:50, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

  I apologize if this scans as a negative implication about Johnpacklambert's character; I did not intend this when I wrote the comment. jp×g 01:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

  Please refrain from casting aspersions. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 02:07, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

• Keep, considering the subject has been the subject of several profiles from RSes like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. -Shivertimbers433 (talk) 00:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. Numerous media stories. Integral figure for understanding the GameStop story, and why WallStreetBets has attracted millions of new members in such a short time. This feels like deletionism for the sake of deletionism. Moncrief (talk) 00:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. Come on, he’s already being asked to the house financial services committee. 2603:8000:D900:87C7:25B6:E36B:7F9:8A88 (talk) 02:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
• so that's ppl trying to hiding something to history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.187.98.147 (talk) 02:37, 4 February 2021 (UTC)