Spoony the Pussy One: Life is in the Render Queue

[Rushy]

Well, you are mostly correct and I am loathe to defend any IN for their laziness and abject uselessness. However, a long form video probably has to be scripted, certainly has to be edited. This is closest thing resembling work as it gets for an IN and as we all know, the dreaded work gives an IN considerable mental distress.

He has an editor for when he posts his streams on Youtube.

[Guest]

Holy shit his wikipedia page is gone, truly this is the year of Spoony.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spoony_Experiment

[Guest]

Holy shit his wikipedia page is gone, truly this is the year of Spoony.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spoony_Experiment

Here's the deletion log:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... Experiment

[pibbs]

The reason for deletion:

SpoilerShow

The Spoony Experiment (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · newspapers · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)
Page on a minor e-celeb with a website and a youtube channel. It was originally nominated for deletion in 2010, and the only thing that saved it then was that he had won some kind of award through Mashable. Now, I have never heard of this site before, so I have no clue how important this award is. Second, the award was won simply through an online poll, so his fanbase just voted for him on mass in a relatively obscure poll. Conclusion: the poll should not be used to determine his notability. The bigger issues is that he has few sources if any, and the page uses primary sources. These were issues when the page was made in 2010, and the page was tagged in 2012 for these issues, but they haven't gotten better.

Now, I can imagine a page of questionable notability in 2010, but through the years, their fame has grown and now they're notable. But this isn't the case. If anything, his fame has dwindled even more, and he appears to be retired.

Short version: few if any reliable sources to establish notability, and his only award is of questionable validity. Harizotoh9 (talk) 05:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 05:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Delete - I see a couple bits and pieces, of which this is probably the best, but not quite enough to satisfy WP:BIO or WP:WEBCRIT. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:46, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Keep [1] and also all the rest about him. He is notable enough that a major game maker, Richard Garriott, brought him over to his castle and did a series of interviews with him, and praised his work. The awards he won were considered notable at the time, not sure if that's changed. The guy has done a lot of things [2] but not sure if any of those got reviews anywhere. There wasn't as much coverage for internet people in the media back when he was most active so hard to find anything but passive mentions of him about. Dream Focus 16:12, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
His relationship with Richard Garriot, or how many entries he has on imdb is irrelevant. What matters is sources, and we have 1 short profile. If he ever becomes notable, that coverage will be useful in building a page. But as of now, he's not notable. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:02, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
There's the app.com one that I linked, indeed, which of course is not enough in itself. I'm not aware of a notability criteria that involves invitations to castles, but if you have other in-depth coverage in reliable sources, I'm happy to switch to keep. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:12, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Delete Most of the sources are non-independent or brief. There's the one interview above but this doesn't appear notable for a youtuber. Reywas92Talk 06:04, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included by Dream Focus in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Delete per the comments above. Lacks the multiple independent significant pieces of coverage needed to demonstrate notability or meet WP:WEBCRIT.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:57, 16 April 2019 (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

TL;DR He wasn't important enough to have his own page on Wikipedia

[Dehbashi]

Funny that they bring up his relationship with Garriot to keep him as if it was a good thing. Garriot and Spoony though have stuff in common. Both became popular in the early days of their fields. Both become delusional on how great they are and blame others for their initial downfall. Both get excuses until they fuck so badly that people realize they are frauds. Spoony of course his failed movie and Garriot with Shroud of the Avatar bombing

[VoiceOfReasonPast]

And the best part is that he'll probably not even react to this deletion.

[Kugelfisch]

Well, his website is mostly defunct with dead links and the last post being from December 2017. His reviews are mostly gone and only on YT thanks to Russians but not him and he does pretty much nothing. Saying that he's retired is the logical conclusion.

[Guest]

Spoony must hate Russians because of blormpghf when the vodkaniggers are the only people to preserve his "legacy". Now THAT is a cfrime the CIA needs to investigate.

[Guest]

It was originally nominated for deletion in 2010, and the only thing that saved it then was that he had won some kind of award through Mashable. Now, I have never heard of this site before, so I have no clue how important this award is. Second, the award was won simply through an online poll, so his fanbase just voted for him on mass in a relatively obscure poll.

What? Mashable's Funniest Person to Follow 2009 isn't the hottest shit anymore? Say it ain't so!?

[VoiceOfReasonPast]

What's a Mashable, anyways?