Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melissa Flentzeris

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:38, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Melissa Flentzeris[edit]

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

An unremarkable YouTube personality; significant RS coverage that discusses the subject directly and in detail not found.

Appears to be part of a recent series of creations on similarly nn Youtubers; see for example, ThatWasEpic, Justin Stuart & Andrew Scites from the same contributor, which were recently deleted at AfD:

K.e.coffman (talk) 03:34, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:35, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:35, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I know these series of deletion are started by K.e.coffman or Hawkeye75 at the same timeframe and only they're applied to articles about YouTubers who are on Knowledge graph, I made these articles months early and they were pattrolled by someone else, so if they weren't marked for speedy deletion at the time of creation, this is a conspiracy to stop YouTubers making money, while there is also a huge wave of unmonetizing videos of these YouTuber, this somehow is related to Google. While the articles were made using an amount of refrences I have no idea how Wikipedians dare to lie they didn't find "any" news articles about the person. Also I have notices changes on Knowledge graph at the time these AfD were made and Google somehow broke their own privacy by letting some Wikipedian here access my personal info such as letting them read emails. Don't expect me zip my mouth and sit and not talk about it. BTW I don't make money from writing articles for these people, not like other YouTubers and celebrities who have special users to update their articles. Don't accuse me publicly and this is increadiable how Wikipedia admins don't even make a comment about them. I made articles about YouTubers who I've been whatching their videos for some years now and thought they can have articles to help inspire their works. Mjbmr (talk) 15:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Mjbmr (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Mjbmr (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you could give us more info/proof on YouTubers who pay special users to update their pages that would be great. Hawkeye75 (talk) 18:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOT (and by the sound of things, WP:PAID) Exemplo347 (talk) 21:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for ever so many reasons, in particular WP:NOADS -- WP is not a promotional vehicle for non-notable individuals. Montanabw^(talk) 08:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Montanabw....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:01, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No decent coverage. Doctorhawkes (talk) 10:35, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:41, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No significant reliable coverage.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:41, 22 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.