Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Croislla


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:59, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Croislla

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

References are basically all press releases and links to Apple Music or YouTube; I couldn't find enough coverage in reliable, independent sources to satisify WP:GNG, WP:NSINGER, WP:NARTIST, etc. DanCherek (talk) 00:33, 13 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:39, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Portugal . DanCherek (talk) 00:35, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. DanCherek (talk) 23:33, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I meant to put this in the Brazil deletion sorting, not Portugal. My mistake. DanCherek (talk) 23:34, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * the structure of tables with musical works is usually used on ptwiki as a form of promotion. This is a tactic to place links to streaming services: Deezer, iTunes, Spotify, YouTube and others. However, it appears to be a promotional creation (SPAM). See these two sources. Observatório dos Famosos is a portal that propagates releases of marketing advisors. The author, Luca Moreira, is probably the same one who tried to promote himself dozens of times on ptwiki. The other source would be Tiago Ghidotti, another who tried to use ptwiki for spam. Moreira's evidence = elimination. No hesitation. At least it would be like that on ptwiki. Greetings! Edmond Dantès  d'un message? 22:29, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the insight, that's helpful! Yes, I noticed that the ptwiki version of this article has already been deleted in part due to promotional sources and lack of notability, and this seems like more of the same. DanCherek (talk) 22:34, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete Croisla or Croislla? He or her? Both are presented in the article, which as the nominator has observed, is packed with press release material with the same handout shots. What's not presented is any case for notability per WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:26, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Alexandermcnabb It's Croislla, with the double "ll". It's is he, except when he is in drag, and then it is she. Maybe that's what generated the confusion.
 * My understanding of this case is that she's a rather common kind of drag in Brazil, the "Pablo Vittar clone" kind of drag, and (still?) not relevant in Wikipedia standards by any stretch of imagination. A number of the informations in the article must certainly be lies, as according to it he was already marketing himself as a full-fledged drag at the age of...9. Maybe he was doing drag shows by that age led by that agent - an activity that, looking at the kind of shows and the more than scanty clothing involved, would certainly put his agent in jail, was it here in Portugal - but I understand he (or she, if Croislla) became to be advertised on social networks an so on rather recently, and the Wikipedia article is certainly part of that campaign. Furthermore, if you look at the history of the account that created the article, it's more than probable that it is his agent, Vinicius Henuns. A large number of the editions (almost all), both here and on wiki.pt, are about artists this agent represents. Darwin   Ahoy!  00:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)


 * BTW, he's being promoted, with the same story, as Vini Lacroix. Darwin  Ahoy!  01:26, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per discussion above, not notable and promotional. Andrevan @ 00:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)


 * 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.