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.
Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of a musician and comedy video creator, not properly referenced as passing WP:CREATIVE. The primary notability claim here is that his work exists, which is not an automatic notability freebie in the absence of reliably sourced evidence of its significance (third party coverage, noteworthy awards, etc.) -- but after I stripped a whole bunch of "YouTube video cited as circular verification of its own existence" footnotes, the only sources left are his IMDb profile, his own self-published website about himself, a deadlinked newspaper article which I searched for in ProQuest and found that it's just a glancing namecheck of his existence in an article which isn't about him in any non-trivial sense, and a short blurb in a blog which tangentially verifies the existence of a piece of content while completely failing to mention Billy Reid as having had anything to do with it. And even in that ProQuest search, I mostly get irrelevant hits for different Billy Reids, and what little I do get for this one isn't enough to get him over WP:GNG: apart from two wire service articles released within two days of each other in 2013, I just get more glancing namechecks of his existence and a couple of pieces in smalltown community hyperlocals in Vancouver Island, and that's not enough. Bearcat (talk) 17:58, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
Weak Delete - The sourcing in the article is simply atrocious, and not useable for establishing notability. My own search turns up this Times Colonist article also published in the Vancouver Sun. It is substantial and certainly contributes towards notability. But in my search for other coverage, the best I could do was a community paper article, and a guest post in Canadian Living magazine. The article has a link to a Globe and Mail article which is not online any more but I was able to pull up an archive which turns out to be primarily about the show Exposure which Reid is mentioned as the host. If there were one more good source, I'd be convinced to switch to a keep, but this falls just below the notability bar for me. -- Whpq (talk) 14:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
It looks like User:Whpq, that someone fixed the link, and that Globe article is still online. The other Globe article someone added is better though. Also see the Edmonton Journal I mention below. Nfitz (talk) 00:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Keep - The Edmonton Journal article is substantial and pushes this over the notability bar for me. Thanks for digging up the sources. -- Whpq (talk) 01:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:42, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
Keep - In addition to the previous articles, I believe the recently added archived video and newspaper news coverage, as well as his work as a celebrity spokesperson for a nation-wideDoritos campaign should be sufficient for notability. -- FanOfPuppets (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:14, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
YouTube video of interviews in which Billy Reid was answering questions about himself in the first person aren't support for notability — notability is supported by sources in which the subject's significance is being discussed and analyzed in the third person by people other than himself, not by sources in which he's talking about himself in the first person. Being a spokesperson for an online viral video contest is not "inherently" notable, and your source for that is a short blurb that just soundbites a quote from Billy Reid rather than coverage about Billy Reid. And as for the Vancouver Sun hit, well, that was already both addressed in my nomination statement ("apart from two wire service articles released within two days of each other in 2013") and considered and assessed by Whpq in their delete vote. It isn't enough coverage to turn the tide all by itself if it's the only source that's actually getting him off the starting blocks. Bearcat (talk) 13:25, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
To be fair, there is a second Times Colonist article added which is substantial, but that's really just two articles from the same newspaper. It really needs a substantial article from a different source. The other sourcing doesn't really cut it as explained above. An appearance on a morning show doesn't establish notability. I've been on CITY's Breakfast Television, and I can guarantee you that I do not meet the notability criteria. -- Whpq (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
I found an interesting article from the Globe and Mail that discusses how YouTube invited him to edit the video choices on homepage(back when there was a currated homepage.) -- FanOfPuppets (talk) 21:23, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:50, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Giving it one more round for the sake of being included in a couple of lists. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ASTIG😎(ICE T • ICE CUBE) 12:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Keep - With what's been added to the article since the AFD, it does, get past GNG - the Vancouver Sun as noted above is good. Looking in Google and ProQuest, there are more in-depth articles, such as in the Edmonton Journal (also available as ProQuest1468761825). Nfitz (talk) 00:24, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
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.
<div style="font-size: x-small;">The article is a derivative under the
<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License</a>.
A link to the original article can be found <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FBilly_Reid_%28Canadian_songwriter%29">here</a> and attribution parties
Gpedia Ⓡ is a registered trademark of the Cyberajah Pty Ltd.</div>