Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EDP445

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. Consensus is that reliable source coverage prior to the recent sexual misconduct allegations was insufficient to meet WP:GNG and also insufficient to classify EDP445 as a public figure for the purposes of including the allegations per WP:BLPCRIME. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 04:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EDP445

[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)

Had been deproded, beside of the accusations which had to be removed per BLPCRIME no signs of sufficient notability per WP:BIO or WP:GNG so let seek consensus CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:06, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:06, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:14, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article is a case of TOOSOON. I agree with CommanderWaterford that outside of the predator accusations, there really isn't much notable you can write about him, that's why he has never had an article on Wikipedia prior to the accusations. Besides, just look at all the other issues that this article has and has had previously. BLP vandalism, BLPCRIME violations, the use of possibly unreliable sources. The article seriously just shouldn't exist yet until more becomes of his situation. Maybe then there will be more to write about.--🌀Locomotive207-talk 🌀 (Formerly Kieran207) 20:24, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. EDP445 passes WP:NOTABLE. He had thousands of YouTube subscribers, and millions of views. His jokes and videos were widely used on the Internet. Outside of his recent odious actions, he was a notable YouTube personality. However, this article will need Semi or Extended Protection to stop vandalism, whether fits. Modern Major General I quote the fights historical 22:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Views and subscribers are not a valid measure of notability per WikiProject Youtube consensus.--🌀Locomotive207-talk 🌀 (Formerly Kieran207) 22:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Locomotive207. It seems that the article was created on April 21, 2021 (one day after YouTuber Chet Goldstein uploaded the now-deleted video which raised the sexual misconduct allegations) by a user who, in subsequent edits, included the allegations into the article, which could suggest that the article was created in reaction to these allegations, violating the spirit of WP:BLPCRIME. It doesn't seem that EatDatPussy445 was covered much in the media outside of these allegations so the article would likely not grow beyond the size of a stub anyway.--Kzkzb (talk) 00:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Hardly seeing any RSes covering him. Maybe some day people will understand that being a meme or the subject of a flash-in-the-pan controversy within a particular subculture doesn't mean you need a Wikipedia article. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:ENT, WP:PERP and WP:ANYBIO. Mass fail on notability grounds. ——Serial 10:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He was certainly a large content creator with a large audience, however he never received enough coverage by reliable sources to be notable by Wikipedia’s standards. He’s only been in the news because of the allegations, and even then the coverage has been limited. CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 14:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. --Devoke water 16:01, 10 May 2021 (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.