Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Color Man

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. RL0919 (talk) 16:28, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Color Man

[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)

Fails WP:GNG, I cant find any reliable sources. Andrew Base (talk) 15:15, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Andrew Base (talk) 15:15, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. Andrew Base (talk) 15:15, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:22, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:22, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:24, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly delete: This article shows a lack of notability so it should be deleted as soon as possible.Kitaab Ka Kida (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:31, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a non-notable Youtuber. Some have argued we tend to delete too many internet related articles because of our insistence on sourcing. However considering that the birth year we have with the most articles connected to it, 1989, is so recent, I think the easier access to recent sources outweighs any effects of some professions not yet having good secondary source coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:15, 16 December 2019 (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.