Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-Mortar

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. ✗plicit 12:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Post-Mortar[edit]

[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 youtube series, fail of WP:GNG, cannot find anything that would indicate a pass of notability. nearlyevil 665 11:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil 665 11:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The series sounds interesting, but there's barely any coverage out there for this series at all, let alone enough to establish notability. It's just WP:TOOSOON for this to have an article and this could probably be speedied. It's honestly very, very difficult for most podcasts and online personalities to get that level of notability. For every one person, channel, or series that does achieve this level of notability, there are hundreds upon thousands of popular series that don't. I always like to point towards PewDiePie as an example of how very difficult this can be to establish, as he continued to fail notability guidelines for quite a while despite having millions of subscribers. The Game Grumps guys also had their articles challenged at one point or another. It's just that difficult to establish notability. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:40, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for a well thought out reply. I can understand the issues with notability, as I cannot reasonably guarantee the historic or societal value of the series. It's sad to think it may never get an article, based on the similar troubles others have faced, regardless of notable value.

I don't think I can make much of a case here, as I do agree with the reasoning behind the opposition. However, given the issues others have had with keeping their articles, the rules may simply be a bit scrutinous. They're also inconsistent, as I've know several other people, much smaller than PewDiePie or Game Grumps, who've had no 'notability' issues with their articles.

Again, I do understand the worry here. I believe its notable enough to be catalogued, and I hope someday the community will see it the same way. The best I can do is save the contents for if and when that day should come.

Thanks,

- Alex MagellanDragon (talk) 22:24, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Interesting series; unfortunately, no significant secondary independent sources about the show (interviews are not secondary/independent). WP:TOOSOON — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Article is a WP:COIEDIT, based on initial article creation's edit comment[1], and creators userpage[2]. Both stating that they are the creator of the series Alex Nuelle. Even if people think the article is notable, at best move it to a draft and then let it go through review process after proper COI disclosure are done by author. WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:25, 9 June 2022 (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.