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 Keep as the consensus seems clear enough to close and not wait until a week comes to, any needs for moving the article's name can be acted with no needs for AfD (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 05:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DanTDM[edit]

DanTDM (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG. The only independent sources are a Business Insider, a Guinness Book of Records entry and a Nick Kids awards nomination, none of which qualifies as significant coverage. Mosmof (talk) 03:10, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This guy has received substantial coverage from independent sources. For instance The Guardian. BBC, Birmingham Mail and The Big Issue. That should allow him to whizz past the threshold.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 13:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. If https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PewDiePie is valid so is DanTDM. They are both wildly successful youtube entertainers. CarsonOGin Feb 9 2016
• Keep - Clearly meets the threshold for notability per the sources in the article per the sources Amberrock linked. However, I ask that Amberrock include those sources in the article if they have the time. Andise1 (talk) 01:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and Rename to to Daniel Middleton. All of the above news sources refer to him by his real name. It should be structured like Joseph Garrett's article where DanTDM and The Diamond Minecart are his YouTube aliases. [1] [2] [3] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:54, 11 February 2016 (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.