Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giorgi Danelia (Youtube personality)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2020 December 9.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:41, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Giorgi Danelia (Youtube personality)[edit]

[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)

No evidence of notability. The references used in the article provide trivial coverage and are irrelevant to the corresponding text. M4DU7 (talk) 10:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. M4DU7 (talk) 10:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. M4DU7 (talk) 10:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. M4DU7 (talk) 10:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - Instagram followers, TikTok followers and YouTube views do not amount to passing GNG; lack of sources covering him in-depth Spiderone 11:11, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "Unboxing" and family adventures aren't worthy for notability, could at best be a line or two in a list of Georgian internet personalities. Oaktree b (talk) 16:09, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He has four followers on Twitter. The consensus is that even millions of followers on YouTube does not create automatic notability. Bearian (talk) 23:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is a serious lack of credible sources. It also seems the article is posted for self-promotion purposes.--Philosophicalscientist (talk) 18:48, 2 December 2020 (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.