Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WifiSkeleton

WifiSkeleton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Topic seemingly fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. Currently, the independent coverage consists of: 1. a tabloid article, 2. an article that relies on the previous article, and 3. an article that cites the subject's fandom page as its source. I did my own search and was unable to find any significant coverage outside of tabloid articles concerning the subject's death. – AllCatsAreGrey ^(talk) 15:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. – AllCatsAreGrey ^(talk) 15:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This AfD is rampant with single-purpose accounts that all want the article kept just because they're supporters of the artist (and all of their posts are equally horribly written). One even runs a fansite devoted to him. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 03:53, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

His death is linked up to his discord server, including a stage talk in discord, unfortunately no one has a recording or a youtube video of this stage announcement , i could add images of his closest friends saying stuff, and due to lack of proof, the only things i have/we got is that he overdosed on drugs. MasonCityIowaUser (talk) 16:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC) — MasonCityIowaUser (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Miami-Dade County Medical Examiners Case Number 2025-01306 is the examiner report for skel, users were told by gothangelz staff not to post it as it provided his full name, any image of the report posted gets deleted which suggests that it is actually him. 2skate (talk) 22:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC) — 2skate (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

This doesn’t matter anyway as it doesn’t establish subject notability. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 23:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“Images of his closest friends saying stuff” are not viable sources. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 23:14, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he said he was going to kill himelf and hasnt been heard from since with people close to him saying hes dead seems pretty viable 185.111.172.171 (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. Without legitimate sources it's hearsay. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 03:12, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

irrelevant ahh Aarnavdave (talk) 01:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC) — Aarnavdave (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

If you wanna keep the article solely because you like skel then you have no say 🥀, I like skel too but unfortunately I don't think he's notable enough for an article. Cyb3rstarz (talk) 04:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. – AllCatsAreGrey ^(talk) 17:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet, Florida, and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. His music is good but he's definitely not notable enough. Cyb3rstarz (talk) 19:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely notable enough now, more monthly listeners than jaydes yet jaydes has his own article. He has a song with over 40 million plays that is currently trending on social media and is number 32 on the charts of most popular songs in the US. 2skate (talk) 22:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

100% notable enough, i do agree the sources in the article could be better but i do not think it should be deleted personally BigChungusOnVinyl (talk) 05:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@2skate Popularity ≠ notability. Notability is coverage in reliable secondary sources, not how many “plays” something has.

Also, by “charts of most popular songs in the U.S.”, do you mean the most popular songs on Spotify in the U.S.? Wikipedia uses stuff like Billboard charts as sources, not single-platform charts. ApexParagon (talk) 22:51, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hes notable for killing himself boom done 2skate (talk) 03:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, there’d be millions of articles on Wikipedia which simply state “Bob was a plumber. He later killed himself”.

Dying does not make someone notable, alas. Especially if there are no reliable secondary sources reporting the death. ApexParagon (talk) 05:21, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he had millions of subscribers on yt when he was cyrus and has like 2 million mponthly listners definitley notable enough 185.111.172.171 (talk) 22:40, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned above, popularity does not equal notability. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 05:55, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

man i think the page just needs to stay up lmao it's not that deep BigChungusOnVinyl (talk) 03:59, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I tagged the article for notability as there is no viable coverage of his music and only tabloid/news farming sites were reporting his death. Sourcing in the article is trash and he has no notable discography, chart activity nor label work. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 20:16, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. To be frank, he is only currently popular due to having a viral song and because of his death. This doesn't really constitute for a Wikipedia article. Sosumiw (talk) 11:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]