Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruby Granger

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. Tone 22:11, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby Granger

[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)

The article is based on the subject's personal website and a re-hash of one of her videos. I can find no indication that reliable coverage exists on her. There is this article from the unreliabel news provider The Tab. The article, a copy paste job from one of it's sources, could be speedily deleted under G12 but I thought I'd take this to AfD over the subject's falling short of WP:GNG/WP:ENTERTAINER Modussiccandi (talk) 16:13, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 16:13, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 16:13, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 16:13, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails GNG, No independent coverage whats so ever. The subject in question is not notable enough to have a standalone page on Wikipedia. - FitIndia ^{Talk Admin on Commons} 17:12, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "Enviable study habits", please... Oaktree b (talk) 21:24, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-49419641 and https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/study-tubers-meet-the-new-teen-vlogging-stars-of-youtube-9nnp8v99n/ seems to be a bit of coverage. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:33, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 19:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Thanks for this. These pieces are both clearly significant coverage in reliable sources. Independence seems to be the problem: I think the BBC piece is too heavily based off direct quotations from the subject to be regarded as independent, while the Times article seems to be just fine. Overall, this still doesn't seem enough for clear-cut notable; though these pieces point to there being potential for it in the future. Modussiccandi (talk) 19:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete none of the sources are on a level that would lead to notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per past outcomes (we tend to be strict on YouTubers), and WP:GNG ( she hasn't really done anything notable, other than to be another WP:UPANDCOMING teenager). Bearian (talk) 19:37, 28 January 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.