Talk:Mrld

Notability tagging
Your repeated restoration of the tag is discourteous, and falls afoul of WP:BRD. While I may not formally be a NPP reviewer, I'm an editor of 10+ years tenure, 20000+ edits, and know the policies by heart. I have reviewed the sources, found them adequate, and removed the tag accordingly, with a request that the article gets AfD-ed should anyone disagree with my analysis. I don't care about having the NPP reviewer badge, but you should either check the sources yourself or trust other people's judgment, not edit-war to keep the apparent WP:DRIVEBY tag in. No such user (talk) 15:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * And your continued removal of the tag actually violates WP:3RR. And is actually more discourteous since you have done it more times.  As I said on your talk page, the tag is there to assist NPPers in reviewing the page.  I did look at the sources, and it is borderline notability.  And your unfounded accusations are even more discourteous.  And you want to get into tenure and # of edits?  I don't think you want to go there.  Regardless, another reviewer might see it differently than I do, but the other point of leaving the tag is that it might encourage other editors of adding further sourcing.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * WP:WTRMT does not support your request that the tag is there to assist other reviewers who take a look at the article. It is a textbook WP:DRIVEBY tag; every single sentence of this short article is supported by an apparently reliable source, at least several apparently passing the RS bar. And notability is best tested on AfD. No such user (talk) 15:36, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * All the sourcing is either primary (regurgitated press releases or interviews) or from unreliable sources.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You managed to do all that analysis in 3 minutes, between tagging Nelpettai (which took you less than a minute to analyze sources ) and tagging this article? While I find that hard to believe, I must congratulate you for the astonishing speed of curation. No such user (talk) 09:22, 22 December 2022 (UTC)


 * I already moved this article to draft twice but other editors kept moving it back, so here we are. We should discuss the sources here and see if they meet WP:GNG and whether it is significant coverage. I don't believe this needs an immediate AFD. My concern was that the sources are all localized, and "The New Hue" isn't a RS website. However, ABS-CBN is promising that they gave the artist a news interview segment.  AngusW🐶🐶F  ( bark  •  sniff ) 16:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * For purposes of counting sources, ABS-CBN, One Music PH, and Myx count as all from the same group. AngusW🐶🐶F  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It's also not driveby tagging if it's being discussed as with this current thread. AngusW🐶🐶F  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:09, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I was the one who started the discussion, but never mind. While I don't mind it tagged once, edit-warring to keep the tag in without providing a talk page rationale is obnoxious. On to the topic: I'm not personally familiar with Philippine press, but apart from ABC-CBN, Manilla Bulletin and PhilStar are both described in our articles as major media in the country, and they have substantial pieces about the singer. The very fact that she was featured on Times Square – however she got there – strongly suggests that we have a rising pop star, not a vanity article. Thus, I don't see a point of requiring more sources when the existing ones adequately support the little content we currently have and demonstrate notability. No such user (talk) 09:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC)