Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryland Adams

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ryland Adams

[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)

This subject is far from notable by Wikipedia’s standards. There is a major lack of significant coverage addressing the subject directly, and the ones that do mention the subject fall short of being reliable sources. Majority of the sources listed are the subjects own YouTube channel or to instagram posts, see WP:NOSOCIAL. The subject falls incredibly short of the standards that are in place by Wikipedia to establish notability, as being married to someone famous does not make someone notable. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 01:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not meet the criteria set by Wikipedia to establish notability.

4theloveofallthings (talk) 02:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Internet, and Colorado. Skynxnex (talk) 22:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Shane Dawson: Certainly some major publications with news articles on him (People, Business Insider, Cosmopolitan), but only in his relation to Shane Dawson. It is a highly likely search term that can be redirected and merged. Why? I Ask (talk) 22:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I saw some really prestigious articles but all mentioning the subject as the partner of Shane Dawson. I think a merge makes perfect sense in this case. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 23:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz: Do you have an opinion on this AfD? I only ask because you have been a constant presence here on Wikipedia ever since I began editing. You may not remember, but our first interactions included one of my articles being nominated for deletion, which led me to consider giving up on editing. However, you encouraged me not to do that, and here I am :)

Your input on this AfD I initiated would truly be an honor. 4theloveofallthings (talk) 23:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - in agreement with the comments above. Adams is not notable. Fireandflames2 (talk) 12:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete outright for lack of notability-supporting sources. What do we have?

We have YouTube videos created by our subject such as this, this -"we're pregnant!-; more self-made content, as the jargon goes, such as this or that creation; Instagram postings, such as this, for god's sake; the impressive citing of a Hollywood Reporter article, which, alas, is about something else entirely and only name-drops our subject once; more bombastic deployments of the Hollywood Reporter imprimatur, such as this listing of awards, among whose myriad of names listed is indeed our subject; and so on. There is a lot of refreshingly clean air, but not much of the solid stuff required. -The Gnome (talk) 13:42, 29 May 2024 (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.