Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia doesn't care how many friends you have
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia doesn't care how many friends you have page. |
|
This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Stuff you made up
[edit]is only relevant if you're Barack Obama, Rupert Murdoch, etc... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Groupuscule (talk • contribs) 2012-10-15 (UTC)
Wikipedia is the best e-encyclopedia
[edit]One must read these articles to improve their vocabulary and develop some knowledge which is out of the social world. I put forward my prospective to support Wikipedia as much as possible Swapnil Kr. Chaudhuri (talk) 11:36, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
What is a relevant number of social media followers in BLPs?
[edit]This essay is fine and I agree with what it says, but at the moment I look for the opposite info: How many Twitter followers are impressive enough to be mentioned in an existing BLP?
For comparison, the Emma Blackery BLP mentions more than 1.4M YouTube followers right in the silly {{infobox YouTube personality}}
, while the Sasha Grey BLP does not mention more than 1.2M Twitter followers in an {{infobox person}}
or elsewhere on the page.
One of those Twitter aggregators blurred most info on their site, but an ordinary view-source:URL (Ctrl-U) sufficed to get an estimated value of about USD 15,000 per post; <colbert>allegedly</colbert>. Are those followers relevant for, say, Influencer marketing, or too horrible to talk about it?
N.B.: What's missing here is only a WP:NUMFRIENDS#See also section to possible answers or guidelines, not the answer itself. –84.46.53.62 (talk) 08:56, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- Don't do original research. We don't decide as Wikipedia editors what number of followers is impressive. We don't use the numbers reported by the social media sites. If a secondary source takes note of the numbers and reports on them (in a credible way), that's the situation where the numbers might be considered noteworthy enough to be used in an article. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 08:35, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, also discussed in the WP:TEAHOUSE, normal WP:42 rules outside of
{{Infobox YouTube personality}}
, and the one notable YouTuber I'm interested in got an infobox as musician onhermy say so. –84.46.53.3 (talk) 00:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, also discussed in the WP:TEAHOUSE, normal WP:42 rules outside of