Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Try Guys

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:41, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Try Guys[edit]

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

Article about a web series, referenced entirely to its own primary source profiles on the websites of the platforms that carry it, with no evidence of reliable source coverage about it in any unaffiliated sources shown at all. As always, every bit of social media content does not automatically qualify for an article just because its own self-published web presence verifies that it exists: media that it's not affiliated with need to pay it attention to establish that it's notable enough. Bearcat (talk) 18:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:37, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: here are two sources about "The Try Guys": The Highlander, Vanity Fair. AdA&D 18:51, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The Highlander" is a university student newspaper, not a general-market daily, so it doesn't assist in demonstrating notability at all — and the Vanity Fair piece is just a blurb in a "many blurbs about many things" column, not a source that's substantively about the Try Guys. So, no, neither of them help. Bearcat (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:54, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:10, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Independent sources appears to give notability, and general good level of coverage. Nominated for award and considerable quantity of subscribers. I quickly added some of the references...however, page is still stub-level in my opinion and should be expanded.Thsmi002 (talk) 14:24, 31 October 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.