Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BBQ Pit Boys

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. MBisanz ^talk 19:40, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BBQ Pit Boys

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

Very few non-primary sources found on Google. I dream of horses (T) @ 09:55, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - What do you think of this [1]? It's listed among others in the article so not sure if you would consider it in-depth. I will hold off my vote for the time being. --TTTommy111 (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - everything on that page is ligitaimate to their uprising to one of the top grilling shows in the world — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B128:398C:0:16:73BC:4B01 (talk) 14:08, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note from Alexa: I have added more primary sources. (T) @ 03:33, 3 July 2015 (PST)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The one third party source, from the Daily Mail [2], mentions the BBQ Boys only in passing. The balance of the sources cited are YouTube videos and blogs. Even the HuffPo reference [3] only mentions them in passing. Google searches just don't turn up reliable sources sufficient to establish notability. This is an age when anyone and everyone's cat can be a YouTube star and still not meet Wikipedia's standard of notability. See, e.g. Other stuff exists for another take on this. Nothing against the Boys: they're just not notable. Geoff ^{Who, me?} 22:04, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 ^Talk 14:09, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - There are a lot of sources, but none of them talk about the subject of this article in any significant way. Instead, they're all about particular kinds of food, recipes, and the content of their videos -- barely mentioning the "Boys". While that speaks to some sense of notability, there just wouldn't be enough for a stand-alone article here. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:13, 17 July 2015 (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.