Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Kulinski (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. Many of the keep arguments here are rubbish but there isn't a consensus to delete. If anyone has a mind to nominate this article again, it would be helpful to read Wikipedia:Renominating for deletion first. A Traintalk 07:58, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Kulinski (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't cite any independent reliable sources for notability; citations are links to self-produced YouTube videos. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 07:02, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Do you have an argument that addresses notability rather than article quality? --Michig (talk) 07:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    The argument is made quite clearly, because WP:BIO is pretty clear, as is WP:RS; a biographical article that isn't supported by independent reliable sources quite simply has to be deleted. Self-published YouTube videos are not evidence of notability. People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. That doesn't currently exist in this article, and a quick search doesn't find any other substantive reliable sources discussing him. The burden at this point is to provide evidence that the subject has received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable... and independent. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 08:10, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Did the nom try Deletion Review? I think re-nomming an AfD 3 days after it was closed (and low !Voter turnout to boot, I would of relisted it) is not the way to go. L3X1 (distænt write) 02:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Passes GNG as associated with Young Turks" - passing GNG requires independent reliable sources. Do you have any independent reliable sources that can support the writing of this biography? That's what we're looking for. An entirely-self-sourced biography is not appropriate for Wikipedia. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 06:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
  • WP:GNG also states that the coverage needs to be independent from affiliated parties, and from the searches I've done when creating, AfD'ing and editing the article, there just isn't enough independent coverage yet. Hopefully this will change in the future as I personally believe he is above and beyond notable for his own article, but that time has not come yet. Buffaboy talk 00:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:48, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft Keep again but Comment in same time of why this back again?, Already got renominated within 2 months for failed getting reliabe sources is oblivous but again there no time limited of getting this again deleted and if where more mainstream sources like these three are reference or related to him.[Kyle Kulinski 1][Kyle Kulinski 2][Kyle Kulinski 3] (enough last one is unfair to him and his organization but enknowledge his existance in sametime without connected to TYT) – Chad The Goatman (talk) (contribs)  19:42, September 25 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak delete Unfortunately while I personally believe the subject is notable, due to a lack of independent coverage, it's just too soon. Buffaboy talk 00:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure I guess, But it's would help that there very few mainstream sources to him before Justice Democrats fame. – Chad The Goatman (talk) (contribs)  22:04, September 25 2017 (UTC)
Well that's the first direct article about him that I've seen yet. I don't know why it didn't pop up in my searches. Buffaboy talk 14:42, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your question, it showed up on the first page of a Google web search for ["Kyle Kulinski" bio MSNBC].  Unscintillating (talk) 16:41, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No I know that, I mean the search I did a month or two ago. Buffaboy talk 23:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference

[edit]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947(c) (m) 04:53, 2 October 2017 (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.