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. With salt: Some support for salting, no opposition. Creation protection can be removed if an admin feels going forward that reliable sourcing has been found. joe decker ^{talk to me} 15:32, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Tourettes Guy (internet video series)[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Tourettes Guy

Articles for deletion/Tourette's Guy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted by AFD in 2006... long enough that CSD-G4 might not be appropriate. Of dubious notability, lack of third party references. IMDB establishes it exists, but little more than that. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 15:12, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete repeatedly recreated article that does not meet any of the notability criteria outlined at WP:WEB. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 15:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lots o' ghits. Too bad none of them closely resemble reliable sources. Lots of chatter, but it is all blogs, forums, facebook and youtube users. Delete. Dennis Brown (talk) 18:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing. The notabillity hasn`t changed. Marking with CSD-G4.Speedy delete.--Müdigkeit (talk) 20:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt per all above. It is too different to the last version of the salted 'The Tourettes Guy' title for G4, in my opinion. I won't raise objections if another admin disagrees with me on this... It's no improvement. Peridon (talk) 21:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the article is too different for a G4 to apply. I am surprised there are not better references around for a topic so famous, however if the references are not improved I would support a delete. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article has an IMDB page and so do both actors related to it. The show has an official website and one of the youtube videos has almost 20, 000, 000 views. The producer of the show also has an official website. IMO, these four points make it notable enough for a Wikipedia page. 30casesofpickles (talk) 21:48, 19th April 2011 (UTC)

30casesofpickles, could you clarify which of the WP:WEB criteria the web series meets? IMDB pages and "official websites" are user submitted and unrelated to notability. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 20:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and SALT. Non notable web-series that doesn't meet WP:WEB. Dragquennom (talk) 18:33, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I second the comments of Graeme Bartlett. Seems very strange there has been no coverage of The Tourettes Guy anywhere. I wonder if there is anything in his local newspaper?--Shakehandsman (talk) 00:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I can't believe I can't find coverage of this guy, he's been around for a long time and I remember discussing him years ago. The article is also getting decent page views so far [1] (300+ page views daily). Well, if it gets deleted, I'm definitely reposting the content on my blog.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 11:37, 23 April 2011 (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.