Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Onision

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 speedy keep per WP:SKCRIT#2. (non-admin closure) wumbolo ^^^ 18:40, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Onision

[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)

Not important enough for his own Wikipedia page. U injury (talk) 19:42, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Above user have been blocked by Ronhjones for being a vandalism only account. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 11:51, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Ronhjones. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 12:09, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No actual reason provided as to why he doesn't deserve a wikipedia page. He also has 1,690 results on google's news section. 344917661X (talk) 20:58, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - there are plenty of news sources, and most satisfy Sig Cov and Independent. Reliable seems a higher bar for most to jump, but a reasonable reading through seems to indicate a bare pass. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:58, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 11:49, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 11:49, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 11:49, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 11:49, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Onision have significant cover with independent media. And he's a major (albeit contriversal) Youtuber https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=onision&rlz=1CAACAO_enGB805&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjo_6v7xqPcAhXLA8AKHfd4D8UQ_AUIDCgD&biw=960&bih=932 --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 11:50, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Query/Comment @Tyw7 and 344917661X: - does the proposer of an AfD being banned for pure vandalism (in the sense that their account was always a vandalism-only account, as opposed to other reasons for deletion) justify removal of the afd given that there are no other deletion !votes at this point? Nosebagbear (talk) 12:04, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Nosebagbear: I don't know. I thought I might add that comment in case the closing admin isn't aware of the fact. It's more of an FYI. Perhaps another user who's more knowledgable of Wikipedia's policy might chime in? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk to me • ✍️ Contributions) 12:07, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Also did Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/It's Alive! (card game). Probably as attempt to have some "good" edits. You could try seeing what other's think at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. Not sure if there is a reason for removing this AfD early, might be better to let it run its course. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 12:31, 16 July 2018 (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.