Talk:Junlper
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review prior discussions if you are considering renomination.
|
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them.The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. |
 | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
Q1: Why does this article exist, when there are other bigger Twitter accounts that don't have articles?
A1: Wikipedia has a set of policies to determine whether a topic is notable enough for an article, the most general of which concerns the extent of coverage in reliable sources. They have nothing to do with perceived prominence, and even less to do with follower count. Theoretically, an account could have no followers, but still have a Wikipedia article if it received enough good coverage. If there's some other social media account you think meets these requirements, you're also welcome to create it yourself! Q2: Can you please delete this article?
A2: There are several processes through which articles can be deleted on Wikipedia. The only one this article is currently eligible for is via an articles for deletion (AFD) nomination. This article has previously been nominated for deletion via AFD four times (1, 2, 3, 4), none of which reached a consensus to delete. The most recent deletion nomination ended without a consensus. Anyone is free to re-nominate the article for deletion, though the admin who closed the most recent deletion discussion requested a one-year moratorium on deletion nominations for this article. Also, if you have been sent to this article to seek its deletion by a post on Twitter/X or another social media site, please be aware of Wikipedia's policies on canvassing. Q3: Can you add more coverage about her posts on Bluesky?
A3: We use reliable sources to source content for articles, and Junlper's Bluesky postings have not received significant coverage yet. If you have a source, please feel free to add it or suggest it on the talk page so we can expand the coverage of her posting there! |
Notability
| Pointless time-wasting. Already covered by the FAQ at the top of this page. |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
This person has less than 200k followers on Twitter and is a writer for the onion. This hardly qualifies as notable OnHereAlot (talk) 03:32, 4 January 2026 (UTC)
|
Notes
- She confirmed that when she said that this image from User:JunLpermode was uploaded by her here
Real name usage
This article uses "Junlper" more than her real name, compared to other similar articles such as Phillip Buchanan (Catturd) and Paul Dochney (Dril). (see also articles on Youtubers) Is it warranted to change most mentions of "Junlper" to "Sternbach"? GarethBaloney (talk) 13:24, 16 February 2026 (UTC)
- Yeah if they're arguing this person has an notability based on sources, we should be using the real name. JonathanMRosenberg (talk) 22:25, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
- This is not, by itself, a persuasive argument any more than it would be to suggest that we should update our Elton John article to refer to him as Reg Dwight throughout just because that is his real name. What would make the difference would be if the sources shifted to using her real name more. (Not that it is relevant here, but I would expect both Catturd and Dril to be similar in this respect.) DanielRigal (talk) 23:01, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
- ? You just scolded me for bringing up other users as an example of an argument. So why bring up Catturd and Dril?
- You seem very defensive of this person. I don't think that Wikipedia should host fanpages for very niche internet celebrities who have small but very dedictaed fanbases. That seems to violate the purpose of an encyclopedia. JonathanMRosenberg (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
- OK. Let me make this clear. This page is for discussing the article, which you can do if you want to. If you have a problem with Wikipedia at a more general level then please either drop it or take it to a more appropriate page. If you have a problem with Junlper herself then please keep that off Wikipedia. If you are just trying to start an argument then please don't. You had your say on the AfD. It wasn't persuasive. If you think this article is a waste of time then it would be more productive, and probably more enjoyable, for you to find one that is more to your tastes and work on that instead. It doesn't sound like there is anything for you here. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:40, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
- I agree. Doug Weller talk 09:59, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
- The problem is that the majority voted to remove this page during the AfD, and it was overruled by the admins. Whether the argument was persuasive or not is subjective, but the fact that the majority of people on and off Wikipedia find its existence ridiculous is not. JonathanMRosenberg (talk) 14:36, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
- If any uninvolved Administrator (or anybody else) wants to use their corrupt, evil and extremely scary powers to roll this nonsense up... DanielRigal (talk) 14:55, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
- OK. Let me make this clear. This page is for discussing the article, which you can do if you want to. If you have a problem with Wikipedia at a more general level then please either drop it or take it to a more appropriate page. If you have a problem with Junlper herself then please keep that off Wikipedia. If you are just trying to start an argument then please don't. You had your say on the AfD. It wasn't persuasive. If you think this article is a waste of time then it would be more productive, and probably more enjoyable, for you to find one that is more to your tastes and work on that instead. It doesn't sound like there is anything for you here. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:40, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
- This is not, by itself, a persuasive argument any more than it would be to suggest that we should update our Elton John article to refer to him as Reg Dwight throughout just because that is his real name. What would make the difference would be if the sources shifted to using her real name more. (Not that it is relevant here, but I would expect both Catturd and Dril to be similar in this respect.) DanielRigal (talk) 23:01, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Majority of sources reference topic, not listed individual.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Many of the references used in this article are discussing the 2 events that are used to prop up the notability requirement for this individual.
Should it not be that we have simply the 2 articles for these 2 events rather than a page that allows for lots of autobiographical inserts. (reads alot like an autobiographical article; 4 accounts monopolize discussions here and pretend to have authority over article - smells like sockpuppet) Redatlas (talk) 20:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
- Go file an SPI if you want to. I've got popcorn. But seriously though, don't. You should not make accusations of sockpuppetry without evidence and the admins have got enough genuine SPI reports to deal with without people adding bogus ones. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
- @DanielRigal I'm not sure why you bothered replying honestly. A complete non-statement with overtly defensive posturing. Redatlas (talk) 20:11, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
- So you think you can make baseless accusations but you are surprised when people reply to them to tell you that they are baseless? If you think you have evidence of sockpuppetry (which you don't) then file an SPI. If you know that you don't have evidence of sockpupetry, or even reason for suspicion, then please pack it in with the baseless acusations. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Well you are making unsubstantiated claims of socking based on ??? Vibes? That you don't like the article? Hardly assuming good faith. As DanielRigal says if you do have evidence WP:SPI is that way. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 20:19, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
- @DanielRigal I'm not sure why you bothered replying honestly. A complete non-statement with overtly defensive posturing. Redatlas (talk) 20:11, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
- I hate this article, I think it shouldn't exist because of weak sources, and I also hate Junlper's political views. At the same time, please WP:AGF. I know most of the editors you're talking about and they are definitely not sockpuppets. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 20:28, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Edit request to complete AfD nomination
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Junlper has been listed at Articles for deletion (nomination), but it was protected, so it could not be tagged. Please add:
{{subst:afdx|5th|help=off}}
to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. Flixxy0 (talk) 03:21, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
- See my comment at the AFD nom . 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
Already done Day Creature (talk) 06:10, 13 August 2026 (UTC)
Political Views
@Wasianpower I feel like if the whole thing is about a twitter user, then her tweets aren't particularly undue? we can buff it out with other stuff, but I don't see why the fight about 9/11 currently is any less viral than the dick vein stuff. we can move it to the main tweets section if you prefer Reflord (talk) 14:48, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
- WP:UNDUE indicates we should follow the due weight in our reliable sources. The "the fight about 9/11 currently is any less viral" because it hasn't been reported in any reliable secondary sources, see WP:PRIMARY. This is also a BLP article and we need to be careful about how we represent things, and it's not clear what policy basis this factoid has over any other random tweet about politics. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 26 August 2026 (UTC)