Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Typical Gamer

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. Aoidh (talk) 04:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Typical Gamer

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

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

Fails WP:GNG, sourcing insufficient to demonstrate notability. The idea that playing Fortnite and Grand Theft Auto V may make you notable is a charming conceit, but it's not backed by WP:SIGCOV in RSes. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, and Canada. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It does have a piece of SIGCOV in Polygon, but I couldn't really find anything else of note. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable, only hits on .ca websites are Alexa Answers, then pintrest and other non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 15:37, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: In addition to Zxcvbnm's source above, I found a NYT article that features him enough to consider it significant coverage as well. ([1]). Between the Polygon article above, this NYT article, and a scattering of small amounts of coverage in Dot Esports (a reliable source per WP:VG/RS) with an example here [2]), I'd say he passes WP:THREE to meet GNG, but barely. Nomader (talk) 04:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Zxcvbnm. There is some coverage, but it doesn't hit the threshold of WP:SIGCOV. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added sources Nomader gave. Hurricane BP Member (talk) 05:05, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not enough reliable sources to prove notability. Promotional in tone and contains mainly primary sources, blogs or news releases. and the Verge source makes no mention of the subject at all. (The article is also terribly written.) sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 17:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - simply not finding enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Still fails notability. GlatorNator (talk) 23:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.