Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Carriker

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. Kurykh (talk) 21:45, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Carriker[edit]

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

Notability GoldenSHK (talk) 04:30, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 April 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:00, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:GNG. Non-noteable internet personality. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 05:06, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I edited the article to address WP:GNG and I believe that, except for minor personal details, the majority of the article is relatively well covered now. Saturnalia0 (talk) 14:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see that a significant part of his notability is his internet videos of him shooting his many guns, and so I've added to the Firearms delsort page, too. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:17, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable internet personality. Sources therein are not suitable for Wikipedia (niche sites, blogs). sixtynine ^{• speak up •} 21:39, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete now we have celebrity doctor veterinarians. OK then. Non-notably internet personality. Clearly promotional and it will not be worth the community's effort to maintain the neutrality of this article (if we could write one with sufficient independent RS with significant discussion) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jytdog (talk • contribs) 21:09, April 8, 2017 (UTC)
Comment All the sources are of a decent nature and don't promote him in a celebrity sense. They merely state who he is and what he does. I think someone with almost 3 million subscribers is "notable" according to common sense and wikipedia's guidelines. It's reasonably well sourced and, as mentioned above, if a source about his age and date of birth arise in the near future, this article should not be deleted. The sources are separate from him (i.e. he didn't publish them), secondary and reliable. --JC (talk) 18:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Let's look at the sources shall we?
  - stinger - some blog. very low quality and we don't use blogs for BLPs per BLPSPS
  - firearms blog. what it says. big shocker that a firearms blogs writes about firearms vlogger. see above.
  - local fox news 1.58 minute video segment from Feb 2016 that will be gone in a year, and was clearly some "human interest" news filler
  - vetranch his website. not independent
  - piece in the battalion the student newspaper of his alma mater. kind of OK but not really independent
  - local CBS news piece from April 2016. human interest filler, but has text that should persist. this is the best so far
  - high plains journal from Nov 2015. This is the best so far.
- so two good sources, one kind of OK source. some blogs and his own website. Marginally N at best. Jytdog (talk) 21:20, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OBS: The Stinger is a student newspaper as well. Saturnalia0 (talk) 22:04, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable YouTube personality. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 08:32, 16 April 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.