Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Easy Languages (YouTube)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Easy Languages (YouTube) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This YouTube channel does not meet the inclusion criteria. After reviewing the cited sources, it is clear that there is a lack of significant, independent, and reliable coverage necessary to establish notability. The first two sources are interviews with the subject, which are inherently not independent and cannot be used to demonstrate notability. The third source, published by the University of Münster (uni-muenster), also fails the independence test, as the host of the YouTube channel appears to be an alumna of the same university. The fifth source cited in the article does not mention the YouTube channel at all. Junbeesh (talk) 08:16, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and Germany. Junbeesh (talk) 08:16, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
Keep. I fixed a broken link which was the reason why the fifth source was being claimed as irrelevant. In addition, the idea that writing about an alumna is a conflict of interest seems spurious to me. This seems like the same idea as arguing that academic journals are default biased by focusing on a specific topic; the topic here is just "alumni/ae of the University of Münster" instead of something like "education". Mcavoybickford (talk) 12:40, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- Appreciate you fixing the broken link. That said, the source is just a directory/listicle that briefly mentions Easy German among other channels. It is only a few lines with no real depth and would not count as significant coverage by Wikipedia standards for establishing the subject's notability.
- And yes, the uni-muenster article does not seem to be independent. It is full of quotes from the subject and there's even a disclaimer at the top stating This text is taken from the alumni|sponsor magazine of the university newspaper 'wissen|leben,' summer semester 2022 issue. That magazine features stories submitted by their own alumni. Anyone who attended the university can send in their story to be featured.
- Wikipedia expects significant coverage to be both substantial and independent of the subject, which isn't the case here. Junbeesh (talk) 07:13, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- weak keep: A thesis [1] and some discussion in a journal [2], with the other sources in the article we should be able to build a basic/stub article. Oaktree b (talk) 21:27, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- Catalan-language paper here [3]. Oaktree b (talk) 21:28, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- These alone do not establish notability, though they may contribute toward it. The primary requirement is that the subject must have received sufficient, significant coverage in multiple secondary sources that are both reliable and independent of the subject. Junbeesh (talk) 07:19, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
- Catalan-language paper here [3]. Oaktree b (talk) 21:28, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- Weak keep I think the journal article and Catalan paper are two significant independent reliable sources, as is The Local [4]. With the other borderline sources I think there's just about enough to push this into notability. Eddie891 Talk Work 16:26, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:24, 28 April 2025 (UTC) - Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)