✕
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2025/JackSucksAtLife

Add links
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Image Delete. Ternera (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JackSucksAtLife

[change source]
JackSucksAtLife (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

2001:569:7C59:1E00:D037:B6C2:DA17:FFCB has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: The page is not notable enough (Possibly fails WP:GNG). In English Wikipedia, that page was deleted in 2020 and the page was salted to stop editors from creating that page. 2001:569:7C59:1E00:D037:B6C2:DA17:FFCB (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

[change source]

Image Delete: The page should be deleted due to almost lack of notability, the JackSucksAtLife in English Wikipedia was deleted due lack of notability for inclusion, causing the page on English Wikipedia to be salted. It was also deleted multiple times as seen in the deletion log of the page. 2001:569:7C59:1E00:D037:B6C2:DA17:FFCB (talk) 19:28, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image Keep - There are much more sources citing the YouTuber than there where in 2019 when it was salted. I believe that they are notable enough to have a page. Deveroonie 23:11, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I know! FaroeFO (talk) 12:37, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, this is completely right. He has gained millions of subscribers and thousands of reddit members and his actions have prompted news recognition. 2A00:23C7:4789:6B01:4004:4BAA:A80E:D912 (talk) 16:10, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    And for the arguments made that subscriber counts don't equal notability, i agree. Even if his growth in following isn't recognised, i believe that his trademark as "The Playbutton guy" is notable enough. He has been invited and has collaborated with multiple youtubers (KSI, Mr Beast, and PewDiePie), who are all youtubers that are arguably the most notable of all.
    Even then, he has grown out of this trademark—while still being recognised for it—into other niches, such as his workout videos, which have earned him a mention in multiple news articles, which mention his name and career as a youtuber.
    ~~~ANA 2A00:23C7:4789:6B01:4004:4BAA:A80E:D912 (talk) 16:17, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete - While the article looks more promising than it did in 2019 it seems, I don't think the sources truly establish notability here. Half of the sources seem to be his own YouTube which isn't reliable as a source. The Guinness source is a press release, basically. While we haven't really discussed the Guinness records on Simple English it seems, there is a consensus of sorts on English Wikipedia that it's devolved as a source in the past 5-7 years. The coverage of his fitness achievements are likely WP:BLP1E; the coverage is more about the "crazy thing" and not about Welsh. To those citing subscriber accounts, remember that notable does not equal famous and vice versa. CountryANDWestern (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think there is enough variety in news coverage that it validates the notoriety. His fitness content has been posted by top level media outlets like New York Post, often explaining info about him too.
    This combined with the Guinness World Records does give him the correct notoriety imo. 86.28.188.115 (talk) 05:10, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The NY Post is not considered a reliable source through the English Wikipedia so I don't beleive we would consider it one either. The Unilad and similar sites are also not too reliable. Guinness is not considered very reliable either as it's often pay-to-play, and simply having a world record from them does not establish notability on its own. CountryANDWestern (talk) 10:13, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    rather than delete the page why don't you actually find more notable news links as he had featured on many including the BBC in the uk 81.103.98.156 (talk) 21:13, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The issue with this arguement is jack got in the guiness book of world records first back in 2020 so it would be before it was considered s weaker sourse (he is also further legitamised by his direct collaborations with guiness and several large youtubers with wikipedia pages of thier own). Also i feel there are several more notable sourses about him that could be added to the page given time but it has not yet been given the opportunity. 2A0A:EF40:D59:4B01:7228:19FB:BDE4:86F6 (talk) 21:45, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Where are these “several more notable sourses [sic]”? This is the opportunity to share them. CountryANDWestern (talk) 22:01, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep JTplayz (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image Delete: not notable
1timeuse75 (talk) 12:05, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image Delete: I do not see a reason on why we should go back on what was the idea before. For those who do not remember I will do a deep dive into 5 years ago. Jack uploaded a video to his channel where he was looking through his Wikitubia wiki profile (seperate to Wikipedia) and then thought to add to the Bishop Auckland Wikipedia his name at the bottom of the notable people list. He added after (in reference to his own Wikipedia wiki) "If anyone who knows Wikipedia wants to set that up for me great" which sparked a bunch of people to flood both the Bishop Auckland wiki to keep readding Jack and also to vandalise it but also then started making Jacksucksatlife Wikipedia wikis. (Video link as I do not know how to do citations on wikipedia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tZmf4qywZA&ab_channel=JackSucksAtLife)

Following this video, he made a new video to talk about how funny all the responses to this was and then finally realised after someone sent him a long email on why editing a Wikipedia Wiki was not a funny gimmick for a video. He seems in that video to continue to laugh and joke around about the entire situation without really showing any remorse for his actions and potentially just forgot he had told everyone to make a Wikipedia wiki for him. In this video, it shows that this wiki was salted indefinitely. Whatever reason for this to be undone should be specified. (second video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frrTbZomkYM&ab_channel=JackSucksAtLife)

Looking at the notability requirements, there is a need for independant news articles. Considering the only thing that has been written about by news articles is the recent 250k/100k (even news sources cant get the number to be the same) and then before that was Guiness World Records giving a press release on his world records

In relation to his new 100/250k steps fame. To cite some cases here, Max Fosh second nomination (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Max_Fosh_(2nd_nomination)) was posted around the time of his "Welcome to Luton" near London Gatwick Airport. This had allowed him to be featured in both national and international news, however with this being a 1 off case the page was still deleted for WP:GNG

Looking at all the article posts, they all seem to follow a trend of just his video but in words with only really the Mirror actually putting an interview by a GP. Looking at SSSniperwolf second nomination, another editor has created a table to showcase reliablility of sources. 1 of the posts in this that was considered to not follow WP:GNG was entirely based on what SSSniperwolf has said. This seems to fall inline with how the posts that Jack has where it is all just mentioning what he said in his videos. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/SSSniperwolf_(2nd_nomination))

In conclusion, I do not see why this page got unsalted following how Jack both promoted his viewers to make a Wikipedia page for him without any regard for if that would be allowed then when he found out he was not allowed to make a page for himself, instead of making a genuine video to talk about what he did wrong he instead just joked and laughed about the entire situation and all the edits that his viewers had made on Wikipedia. I think on this section if this page was to stay it would just cause more people to show up and vandalise this and potentially other pages if Jack has collaborated with them.

Looking into this more, it seems that in other cases before him, they all seem to sync up with how his page is like and was removed for WP:GNG. I do not see why Jacksucksatlife should get an exception. Dabest1234123 (talk) 11:05, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that video jack actively apologised he didnt continuously joke once he realised what his fans were doing, he was 23 on a much smaller channel and made a mistake, also he mentioned in multiple videos how he felt really bad for any trouble he had accidently caused the Wikipedia editors and encouraged his fans not to try and mske him a wiki in the future, even when he has seen previous attempts (usually on his jacksucksatstuff channel). I feel you have an incomplete picture of the events 2A0A:EF40:D59:4B01:7228:19FB:BDE4:86F6 (talk) 21:53, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These events happened half a decade ago; that is enough time for a child to gain consciousness. And in the same way for a new adult (Mr Welsh was 23 at the time) to gain maturity. His audience and content has completely changed.
Even then, Mr Welsh showed remorse and apologised. link: (I am not allowed to paste it in) while still acknowledging the absurdity of the situation.
If that is not enough for you, in a new video made less than a day ago at the time of writing this, he urges his viewers to stop their efforts. link: (I am not allowed to paste it in)
This obviously shows that Mr Welsh's cult following obviously thinks he is notable for a wikipedia page, without being for vandalism. With such large outcry, i Ihink, rMwelsh obviously needs and deserves a wikipedia page.
Even for the sake of efficiency and gathering all his large feats.
There are multiple websites made in his name, by his fandom. These would be so easy to organise and give as information in a smooth, concise website page such as the JackSucksAtLife wikipedia page.
~~~ANA 2A00:23C7:4789:6B01:4004:4BAA:A80E:D912 (talk) 16:34, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Image Delete There are two "reliable sources", the Daily Mirror and the New York Post. All the other sources are social media, and I wouldn't count those as reliable. Reliable sources are those which are third party, in other words, separate and independent of the subject, and with independent editorial control. Youtube being the platform he uses, anything taken from there is not, in my opinion, useable. This leaves the article with two sources. Neither of those really establish his notability. DaneGeld (talk) 18:09, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are a lot of reliable sources. He is very notable, since he has over 3 million subscribers and he has many new articles about him. There are a lot of other people who have a Wikipedia page and are in the same category. 188.73.232.25 (talk) 18:46, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great, where are those reliable sources? CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to point out as I stated above: NY Post isn't considered a reliable source by the English Wikipedia, so I'm not sure that it works for us either. And the Mirror is a tabloid, too, so that's also questionable. CountryANDWestern (talk) 18:51, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. That leaves ONE reliable source, and even that's questionable being a British tabloid newspaper. They're not known for their quality. So we have social media, an unreliable source. On a BLP, that's insufficient, and a lot of anonymous IP users who think he's notable enough to keep. He fails GNG, and in my opinion only, I suspect these IPs to have a vested interest in getting this article kept. DaneGeld (talk) 08:37, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DaneGeld are not reliable see Wikipedia:NYPOST and Wikipedia:DAILYMIRROR 1timeuse75 (talk) 09:19, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic!!! That's even better then. No sources other than social media. Time for this article to meet the dustbin. I call "no significant coverage" in independent media. DaneGeld (talk) 09:51, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 19:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion/Requests/2025/JackSucksAtLife&oldid=10484716"