Deletion of Chris Stuckmann (YouTube personality)

Comment: per . |Past AfDs have been littered with the articles of |wanna-be celebrities. We are |not a webhost for random people nor are |we are directory of things on the Internet. We are in fact a charity
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW||WP:OUTCOMES||WP:MILL||WP:NOTWEBHOST||WP:DIR)

Comment: since as far as I can tell, he does not meet . https://www.ohio.com/akron/entertainment/heldenfiles/need-more-movie-watching-ideas-local-critic-s-bucket-list-has-some This is the only qualifying source I could find. http://www.wkyc.com/features/film-lover-shares-50-movies-to-watch/68193514 This seems way too brief to qualify. If other sources can be provided, I'd be happy to reconsider. It's completely possible that notability under Wikipedia's standards could be established on a later date, but right now, the article focuses entirely too much on primary sources or sources that do not actually discuss him as a figure but rather mention his work incidentally
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CREATIVE)

Comment: Nothing here constitutes an automatic pass of any subject-specific inclusion criterion (YouTubers are ''not'' granted an automatic presumption of notability just because their |self-published content on YouTube provides metaverification that they exist), and the article is not referenced to enough substantive |reliable source coverage about him to clear  — the references here are almost all |primary sources, and the only two that actually count as reliable sources are both local media outlets in his own hometown and the nearest larger city to it, and thus don't constitute ''enough'' coverage of him. (And anyway, they aren't verifying any substantial information about ''him'', but are simply quoting his opinions on a list of ''films''.) And it isn't appropriate or acceptable Wikipedia process to evade  and/or bypass  rejections by recreating the deleted article at an unnecessarily disambiguated alternate title and then admin-shopping to get the page ''moved'' overtop the salted title, either. The key to getting a deleted article back into Wikipedia is to properly ''address'' the reasons why it got deleted in the first place: namely by providing a stronger notability claim, and better sourcing for it, than this article is showing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:SELFPUB||WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:SALT||WP:AFC)