Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse Cox

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 keep. Already relisted twice, the slight consensus is to keep. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:02, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jesse Cox[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:BIO, article created after subject asked their fans to make it. "I want a Wikipedia page" Alizaa2 (talk) 22:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:27, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:27, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Did you do any WP:BEFORE? The article seems skeletal at this point but the subject is a well-known gaming personality. I think this can easily be WP:RESCUEd, and the nom rationale says to me WP:IDLI (everyone wants a Wikipedia page, who doesn't?). Nate • (chatter) 03:10, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 04:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 04:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not quite persuaded. He has won a Golden Joystick Award which is a strongly notable prize (although in one of the less important categories based on media coverage). But are any of these sources reliable?[1][2][3] He certainly hasn't got as much media coverage as some video game vloggers. --Colapeninsula (talk) 08:55, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is lacking in content, but then again that is why Wikipedia has a stub category. Perhaps in the future the article will be further expanded. While I have no doubt that this article has been added to by Cox's fans, he only referenced it's existence on 23 March 2017, two months after it was originally created. I can guarantee that the subject of the article did not request it's creation, as I <disclaimer> created the article. I believe that the nominator of this article for deletion was simply unaware of WP:BEFORE. More work is needed, but a WP:RESCUE is likely.--SamHolt6 14:40, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:21, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the references and viewcounts aren't particularly notable Youtuber standards. I don't see any mainstream news coverage. Power~enwiki (talk) 02:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. More work IS needed, but this shouldn't be deleted right now. OblivionOfficial (talk) 02:14, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 06:41, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's less than perfect, but looks to me like it's sufficiently notable to keep, as established by the references. ToddLara729 (talk) 12:43, 6 June 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.