Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GeorgeNotFound

GeorgeNotFound

[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!

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

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

Youtube who is mentioned in various articles about the Minecraft community, but I'm not see sufficient depth-of-coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:BIO criteria. The TechTimes article used as a reference in the article is more about him being banned for an unusual reason (harassing himself via an alt account) than anything else. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:23, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment:, the article in question was previously a redirect and was being discussed here: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_April_15#GeorgeNotFound.JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 15:37, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
• Comment This article is a stub, with very few information, and it is not marked as one. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

• @Burgundian Feudalism:, stub classifications do not matter in AfD debates, as we only care about notability. Similarily, an article may have a million cleanup tags, but if it is notable (meets WP:GNG), then it is kept. JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 15:59, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

• Yes, but there are barely any information in this article. Compare that to an article on Dream. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

  @Burgundian Feudalism No one prevents you from tagging it as a stub while the article being discussed here. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:12, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

• Delete. After taking a good look at the sources, there isn't much if any significant, reliable, independent coverage of this particular person. Also of note is the recreation of this article 7 times (3 CSD'ed, 4 via usurp the redirect). Serious salt should be applied. JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 18:29, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Search results talk more about his proclivity to getting banned than about him and those that are about him are not WP:RS. –Fredddie™ 18:33, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
• Delete - This article is mostly just fancruft and WP:BLP violations (personal life only containing something about color blindness). This article also appears to have been recreated many times, so I'm going to recommend WP:SALT as well. Deauthorized. ^(talk) 18:35, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
• Delete - having searched, I haven't found significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, so I believe that the subject fails to meet WP:GNG. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:42, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per above (seems to be a bit WP:TOOSOON), but don't WP:SALT. Instead convert back into a REDIRECT to Dream (YouTuber)#Career as a "related topic", redirecting to an article on a YouTuber whom this individual's notability stems from. Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

• Delete There has been no significant coverage of this person, unlike Dream (YouTuber), I think that the redirect should be deleted to avoid allowing the recreation of the article to bypass AfC. Hemiauchenia (talk) 11:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)