Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Hendrik Walter

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. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 23:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Hendrik Walter (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)

Non-notable lawyer. References are largely unreliable and social media. No secondary sourcing. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 16:36, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Justiyaya 16:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Justiyaya 16:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Justiyaya 16:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - This non-notable TikTok "influencer" lawyer does not meet critieria for WP:ENTERTAINER nor WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 21:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Especially in the area of the connection with law and entertainment he has achieved innovations in the German-speaking area with different formats, especially "#1MinuteJura", which is what made him famous in the first place. In this respect, he even had a significant influence on TikTok's entertainment in the German-speaking area, which at least fulfills one point of Wikipedia:ENTERTAINER. Depending on whether German magazines such as SVZ, watson or Zeit are considered reliable sources, he is also addressed by these according to the WP:GNG --Tobiasi0 (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:ENTERTAINER doesn't apply here. They are decent refs, except apart for Die Ziet, which I think is supposed to be unreliable, which I don't understand. They are reporting on his social media work, which everybody does. It is much of muchness. scope_creep^Talk 12:19, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The RS here doesn't seem very convincing in terms of establishing notabliity. Seems to be referencng Tik tok and other social media, with the odd media article. He has one "new face" award. None of this shows that he meets WP:GNG P{ossibly WPtoosoonDeathlibrarian (talk) 12:36, 16 January 2022 (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.