Major General James G. Blunt

WikiProject YouTube
Project Pages
Main page (talk) Assessment (talk) Style Guide (talk) Members (talk) Message List (talk)
Help The Project
Requested Articles To-Do List
Project Templates
Project barnstar (talk) Project banner (talk) Project userbox (talk) Project invite (talk) Project welcome (talk) Project category (talk)
Wikipedia Templates
YouTubers bio stub (talk) Infobox YouTube personality (talk)
Ads
WikiProject YouTube Ads (talk)
Tools
All Assessment Categories (talk)
changes

YouTubers are Internet celebrities whose fame has come about through their publishing of their own videos on YouTube that they feature in.

Articles about YouTubers are regularly nominated for deletion, and the outcome is generally 'delete'. A frequent argument put forward for keeping the article is that a subject is notable because of their number of YouTube subscribers or the number of times their videos have been viewed. Consensus however is that this is an insufficient basis by which to establish notability.

A List of YouTubers features individuals who have articles about them—some have been nominated for deletion but kept, and others have not been nominated.

WP:N says that "A topic is presumed to merit an article if ... it meets either the general notability guideline below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline" one of which is WP:ENT. However, in practice, some editors involved in deletion debates consider that a YouTuber needs to meet *both* WP:GNG *and* WP:ENT. Some editors do not consider meeting both guidelines to be a requirement, as evidenced by the discussion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SSSniperwolf (2nd nomination) which focused on WP:BASIC and WP:GNG.

In Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Etika, letcreate123 argues that "WP:ENT does not override the former [WP:GNG] as it is under the "Additional criteria" section of the Notability policy. Meeting it only makes it more likely to be notable, but it does not guarantee it and the reverse also holds true; not meeting the additional criteria does not mean the subject in question is not notable."

The subscriber count on the subject's YouTube channel is considered a primary source and is also subject to change (there's nothing to guarantee that the x million subscribers might not all suddenly unsubscribe, even though that may seem far-fetched). So editors like to see the subscriber count mentioned by a secondary source, which comes with the advantage of being a point-in-time record of that count.

• Reliable sources essay WP:NOYT - this is about the content of videos that have been uploaded to YouTube, and doesn't have anything to say about subscriber or view counts.
• Reliable sources noticeboard discussion archive 52: Can YouTube be used as a primary source
• Talk:Natalie Tran#Vidstatsx sourced content
• Talk:Dave Days#Top 50 subscribed

The following table shows the outcome of a selection of AfD discussions about YouTubers. The list is not meant to be comprehensive. Please add to it.

Keep / delete tally

Based on the table above, the percentage of articles kept (including where there was no consensus) as of 3 July 2023 are as follows:

• Per WP:BASIC, the starting point is significant coverage in multiple, reliable, secondary sources.
• If coverage in a given secondary source is more than trivial, but less than substantial, multiple such sources can be combined.
• Primary sources don't count towards notability (though they can be used to support specific content in the article)
• The subscriber count on a YouTube channel is a primary source
• The subscriber count must have been included in something that has been independently written about in a reliable secondary source
• The 'additional criteria' for notable people are helpful, but do not guarantee notability
• Subscriber count helps meet the second criteria of WP:ENT.
• If a YouTuber doesn't have a lot of subscribers, and cites no reliable independent sources, that's grounds for deletion.
• Few articles about YouTubers have been kept unless they have upwards of one million subscribers
• Subscription counts do not make one notable. Nor does wealth, revenue, and other size metrics. This is however a benchmark that can be useful in assessing subject matter—a YouTuber with millions of subscribers is more likely to be notable than one with tens of thousands

If consensus on this essay is established then WP:PEOPLEOUTCOMES could be updated to reflect the common outcomes for AfD discussions around YouTube celebrities, or Internet celebrities in general. Please discuss on the talk page.

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Internet
• Category:YouTubers
• Category_talk:Internet celebrities
• Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 150#Social Media Statistics - a February 2019 discussion of whether subscribers or number of views should be a factor when assessing notability, which was closed as 'no consensus'
• Talk:Mark Dice/Archive 6#YouTube subscriber count