Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olly Riley

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:52, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Olly Riley[edit]

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

This does not appear to pass the general notability guideline or the basic notability guidelines for people. The one source provided does not resolve (HTTP 404), and the article included unsourced negative information. I could not find any independent, reliable sources for this article—everything I found was on sites like tumblr and facebook. (A lot of it was highly derogatory too.) Furthermore, this violates WP:NOTNEWS even if sources could be found, so I believe that this should be deleted. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:44, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm gonna give this AFD a couple of days to give others a chance to source it. I have a nagging suspicion he may actually be notable, so I'll give it a couple of days for someone else to come up with sources. If none are forthcomming, I'll most likely be back to !Vote Delete at that point. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:49, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can find no coverage in reliable sources. As far as I can tell from the unreliable sources, he was the topic of interest for a brief period of time. -- Whpq (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I recovered the dead reference and rewrote the sentence as a result of a copy and paste. However, there aren't any other sources to support an appropriate article and he is not notable of anything significant at this time. SwisterTwister talk 22:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - He isn't an 'internet celebrity'. Only people on twitter know who he is, All because he puts a hashtag infront of a word. Silly waste of a wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.11.115.239 (talk) 22:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Gave it a few days, noone was able to give sourcing to show notability, despite several saying that they looked for such. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:24, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I've tried to look too. No significant coverage, no reliable sources. Delete! - 92.6.5.229 (talk) 14:35, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. — ΛΧΣ21™ 00:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - He's not a celebrity at all. He's done nothing notable. He's just a kid who, like thousands of others, has had that lucky "retweet" that results in getting more followers than he really deserves and, as a result, has that complex that makes him think he's made it. His "T-shirt range" was just someone exploiting him as a "flavour of the month", and Riley himself earned around 3% of the profits (which themselves, were minimal). He'll be forgotten within months (at most). 100% unworthy of a Wikipedia entry. Kjs1982 talk 14:33, 10 October 2012 (GMT)
Delete Hasn't done anything other than acquire a substantial amount of Twitter followers. --—Jennie | ☎ 14:49, 10 October 2012 (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.