Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlie Jabaley


 * 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. signed,Rosguill talk 00:41, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Charlie Jabaley

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Sources are totally unreliable. As examples, the CNN article is a paid segment with pictures provided by Jabaley, and Runner's World is by Jabaley himself. Picture is almost certainly not "own work". Prose, though sanitized of its copyright violations and most of its promotional language, is still promotional. Lastly, this article is the product of a paid editor. Mr. Jabaley is paying people to talk about him.

And the article forced me to read the words "Dabbin' Santa Sweaters". ♠Vami _IV†♠  07:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  ♠Vami  _IV†♠  07:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  ♠Vami  _IV†♠  07:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  ♠Vami  _IV†♠  07:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep for forcing Vami to read the words "Dabbin' Santa Sweaters" Delete per nom. Just doesn't have the sourcing to possibly be anything but promotional, and doesn't have the writing quality to justify its presence regardless. Vaticidalprophet 07:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete as promotional Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete the sourcing is not enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:00, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non notable, can’t find anything that suggests notability. -- Devoke water  15:12, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * sadly i must agree. Delete this hot garbage. JackFromReedsburg (talk &#124; contribs) 20:32, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: The template says: "the article must not be blanked". This was however removed from the article: "In 2009 he signed a group named Travis Porter. In 2010 he cofounded music and artist management company Street Execs Management, and started working with 2 Chainz and Cap1.ref . Isn't Forbes a notable source? Jjanhone (talk) 08:31, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * SoWhy has declined the speedy deletion earlier because of "multiple RS and claims of significance. Stubifying seems possible to take care of the spammy language (CSDH)"Jjanhone (talk) 08:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * And this is what I had written about his career back in January: "Jabaley started his first business in high school back in 2004. He sold cool clothes and shoes out of the trunk of his car in the school parking lot. He started a music studio in his bedroom having 30 kids writing lyrics. He got into producing hip-hop and started making videos for his artist friends. He created a media outlet for independent rappers called Spityourgame.com which started picking up traction. Jabaley and his friends were in the center of a dance movement in Atlanta. In his first year at community college, the website started to become more popular. In 2007 he dropped out of college to go on across the country tour with Soulja Boy as his cameraman. After Soulja Boy fired him he wanted to be a manager. His first signed group was called Vistoso Bosses. In 2009 he signed a group named Travis Porter, and they ended up with three top-10 songs on the U.S. radio charts without a record deal. In 2010 he cofounded music and artist management company called Street Execs Management, and started working with 2 Chainz and Cap1ref Forbes They were running a multimillion-dollar management company.ref name=RW20180726 ref name=CNN20180730 He created "Dabbin' Santa Sweaters" which was an instant viral Christmas success.ref name=CNN20180730 and Billboard" Jjanhone (talk) 08:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The Runners World piece was edited interview by Marissa Stephenson and the CNN story by By Aisha Nga, CNN. So  ♠Vami, what makes you think it was a paid section? Jjanhone (talk) 09:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I read the Runner's World article. That is not an interview, it is a blog. And what makes me think the CNN article was a paid section is that Aisha Nga is an editor of paid sections at CNN, and all the photos used in the article are credited to Jabaley. – ♠Vami _IV†♠  18:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The format may be of a diary, but as it says it's "AS TOLD TO MARISSA STEPHENSON". So it's editorial. And if a topic of the CNN story is about losing weight, who else could provide the before and after photos than the subject himself? A journalist can do both paid sections and non-paid sections, right? If it's a paid section, then it needs to be marked, at least that's the way in Finland.Jjanhone (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It might be under Finish law, but not American. I agree with Vami. Best, Signed, The4lines &#124;&#124;&#124;&#124; (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 00:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This is what Wikipedia says about Advertorials: "Most publications will not accept advertisements that look exactly like stories from the newspaper or magazine they are appearing in. The differences may be subtle, and disclaimers—such as the word "advertisement"—may or may not appear. Sometimes terms describing the advertorial such as a "special promotional feature" or "special advertising section" are used. The tone of the advertorials is usually closer to that of a press release than of an objective news story."Jjanhone (talk) 07:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Forbes is reliable, but most of forbes.com/sites/ are not. See WP:FORBES and WP:FORBESCON. SmartSE (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you SmartSE! "Editors show consensus for treating Forbes.com contributor articles as self-published sources, unless the article was written by a subject-matter expert". So how can we know that this Contributor "Shawn Setaro Media I write about the music industry" is or isn't a subject-matter expert? Jjanhone (talk) 14:21, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The vast majority of articles at WP:FORBESCON are essentially ads paid by companies. If you think this particular writer is a subject matter expert, the onus to prove it is on you. MarioGom (talk) 14:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I might do that, just to educate myself, but I have no idea about the criteria so I don't know where to start.Jjanhone (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

--Blablubbs&#124;talk 16:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * So I vote for Keep.Jjanhone (talk) 08:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Not Notable, and promo. Signed, The4lines &#124;&#124;&#124;&#124; (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 16:21, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, I don't see sufficient evidence of notability. CNN and RW were addressed above; as for the others:
 * Yahoo: Press release, listicle, unreliable
 * Forbes: Unreliable per WP:FORBESCON
 * Billboard: Mostly quotes, not really coverage of him as a person, and not about him
 * Insider: Not significant coverage of him.
 * CBS News: Single-issue feelgood story that reads like the result of a PR stunt.
 * TMZ: Unreliable gossip, the content is mostly just him talking.
 * Sjmedia: 404, nothing in the wayback machine
 * Sbnation: Mentions him once, in a list, not coverage.


 * 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.