Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julius Dein (2nd nomination)

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. ✗plicit 12:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Julius Dein

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Julius Dein
• Articles for deletion/Julius Dein (2nd nomination)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Julius Dein (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

A strong COI/Paid concern, created by a sock. This was kept at the previous AfD four years ago but, frankly, we got it weak consensus. Have over 20 million followers across social media does not make someone notable. Recently Wikipedia has been deprecated WP:ENTERTAINER#2 (Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.) I don't think he passes WP:BASIC because most of sources are paid news and gossip coverage and from short tabloid news. Doing a WP:Before gave me BBC article that reported he has 20m followers across all social media platforms, not a WP:SIGCOV. Don't forget to look Talk:Julius Dein. VocalIndia (talk) 11:22, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Magic-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

• Delete There is a little notability here but it is not enough for a BLP. --DanielRigal (talk) 12:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
• Delete It doesn't appears to be notable, there aren't enough sources on this individual. Cheers. Tahaaleem ^Talk 15:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

• Delete Sources are weak and not reliable. The forbes articles are paid for and written by contributors. A strong COI/Paid concern, created by a sock too.;" >Talk]] 04:35, 10 August 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.