Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luke Cutforth (2nd nomination)

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. Several reasons for deletion have been given, while on the "keep" side we have merely the statement "notability is there" without any explanation why. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:00, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Cutforth[edit]

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

Non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support. Probably could be CSD'd, but CSD was removed by what looks like a sockpuppett created by author. Appears to be popular, but popularity does not equal notability. reddogsix (talk) 17:06, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 17:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 17:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I'll admit it needs a lot of work doing to it but notability is there, Passes GNG. –Davey2010 • (talk) 06:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Can you please be specific as to how it meets GNG. It does not appear to do so to me or Aoldh. reddogsix (talk) 16:50, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Article's references are full of YouTube videos, press releases, primary sources and sources that would show notability for other things (such as The Vamps (British band)) but not for the article's subject. After digging through a whole bunch of nothing, there isn't anything that would work towards establishing notability for the article's subject. The article's subject utterly fails WP:GNG and comes nowhere close to meeting either WP:BASIC or WP:ARTIST. - Aoidh (talk) 06:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is one of those frustrating cases where we have someone who is fairly popular on YouTube (not PewDiePie or Smosh proportions, but is still known), has participated in various things with notable persons, and has received some notice at his school. The problem here is that none of this has really translated into coverage in places that Wikipedia would consider to be notable. Of the sources on the article, almost all of them would be considered WP:PRIMARY or otherwise unusable as a source that could show notability. Some don't even mention Cutforth at all. Some, as in the case of the iTunes links, are actually merchant sources and are considered to be inappropriate to add to Wikipedia in general for any purpose. (As iTunes's primary purpose is to sell you things- its use as a database is secondary.) Cutforth is popular, but WP:POPULARITY does not automatically give notability- it makes it more likely you'll find coverage, but isn't a guarantee in and of itself. WP:NOTINHERITED (Cutforth's association with other notable persons, groups) pretty much says the same thing: it makes coverage more likely, but still not a guarantee. The biggest claim to fame is the music he's made with other people, but unfortunately there's little to no coverage for these singles and as he's not actually part of the groups he participated with, we can't use their notability towards Cutforth's. As far as the awards go, I can't see where anyone actually covered his wins in any reliable sources. His university did, but they're primary sources and can't be used since it's very much in their best interest to cover a student who won an award. Most of what I found were mentions in passing, like this source and this source. It just looks to be a case of WP:TOOSOON in this instance. It's frustrating since Cutforth has done more than the average YouTube celebrity and has a bit more coverage, but in all it's just not enough for what we look for on Wikipedia. If anyone wants to userfy this, I don't see any problem with that. 03:45, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Delete. The above is a good summary of the situation. Several things in the article come close to estabilishing notability, but then I can't find any reliable sources to support them. Bondegezou (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2014 (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.