Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Tinley

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. I'm going to include the draft in the deletion. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Tinley

[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)

Non-notable voice actor. No sufficient coverage from reliable sources to warrant a standalone article. Fails WP:NACTOR. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, for the same reason. I actually nominated it for speedy deletion like 20 seconds before you nominated it for deletion, so I think you overwrote my nomination since we were editing at the same time.

Gottagotospace (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gottagotospace: Oops, sorry! You can go ahead and restore the CSD tag if you wish to do so. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:04, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I just did that! I wasn't sure if I was supposed to delete the normal nomination for deletion stuff though. So now there's two banners: one about speedy deletion and one about normal deletion. Gottagotospace (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we should leave the tag there. If an admin decides to speedy delete the article, then they will likely close this AfD as well. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It was originally draftified (Draft:Daniel Tinley) then reposted in mainspace.

OIM20 (talk) 02:01, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't appear to take up that much space, and this guy is pretty notable. Why can't he have a small Wikipedia page considering his fanbase and following? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Veryfunkypants (talk • contribs) 20:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- He has 36 followers on Twitch. Gottagotospace (talk) 20:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

91 subscribers on youtube. Why is it so much trouble just to keep this one small page?

There is an article for an Estonian politician with literally one sentence on it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avo_%C3%9Cprus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Veryfunkypants (talk • contribs) 20:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social media site. If anyone with a small social media following was able to have an article about them on Wikipedia, then Wikipedia would become extremely bloated. If Daniel becomes a notable actor and/or streamer in the future, then great - he can get an article then! But as of now, he's at the point in his career where he does not meet notability criteria. Gottagotospace (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool, but you didn't respond to my initial point. Is it not already bloated with 1 sentence articles about totally random people? This guy has a following. Why is it so necessary to delete this page? What specifically bothers you about this page that you want to delete it within 1 hour of when it was created?

Veryfunkypants (talk) 21:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Policing wikipedia must be a cool occupation, but you're also discouraging people from making their contributions, and what they consider to be notable to themselves and others.

Veryfunkypants (talk) 21:13, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make the rules, I'm just informing you of them. Please read Wikipedia's notability guidelines for biographies. I bet plenty of editors (including myself) would be happy to have an article about Daniel on Wikipedia once his career reaches a point where he meets those notability guidelines. Gottagotospace (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but he can just have this smaller, "bare-bones" sort of article, so his community knows. He has a pretty sizable fanbase, including me so that's why I feel this is good for him to have. He's a really nice guys and deserves a bit of recognition for his work. Thanks for the support

Veryfunkypants (talk) 21:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Note: an attempt was made to speedily dele with this discussion open. —Railroadr20 (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC) Struck sock. Hatman31 (talk) 20:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for noticing. Kind of suspicious indeed

Veryfunkypants (talk) 21:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Railroadr20, @Veryfunkypants - Not really. If you read the page history, you'd see that there were multiple editors putting it up for deletion at the same time. This was even talked about in this discussion thread (top) at 21:07 and 21:11. Nothing sus about it. OIM20 (talk) 02:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Absolutely no evidence of coverage by a reliable secondary source. _signed,Willondon (talk) 21:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: After this discussion got started, the apparent subject of the article requested deletion of the article about him, asserting that the page was created with malicious intent. That does make sense, seeing as the original creator mentioned multiple "controversies" related to the subject without proper sources to back them up. I went to Daniel's talk page and let him know he can chime in the AfD section if he wants, but I don't know if he has seen the message. Gottagotospace (talk) 03:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft too, then? OIM20 (talk) 03:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Different IP also claiming to Daniel requested deletion of the draft too (see here). Could be a dynamic IP. Could also not be Daniel at all. Either way, I don't think it matters much since subject does not meet notability guidelines at this time. We really don't need an article about him on Wikipedia at this time, not even as a draft. (Maybe in the future if/when his career gets to the point where he *does* meet notability guidelines, but not at this time.) Gottagotospace (talk) 17:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#What about article x?. Commonly known as WP:Otherstuff. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable, per nom. Seems like SPI is warranted (if not already reported).--Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 14:36, 23 May 2024 (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.