Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Da YoungFellaz


 * 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. Obvious WP:COI, Drmies evaluation of the sources, along with a quick glance (which shows practically every unreliable hip hop source imaginable) indicates this fails WP:GNG which trumps WP:MUSICBIO, and the Billboard thing was completely brushed aside and ignored. For Newrichent we are not a webhost to promote your music, and be lucky you were not blocked, as we block those that indicates a corporation or group. Secret account 05:32, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Da YoungFellaz

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A bunch of mixtapes and YouTube videos, but no hits, no record deal with a notable outfit, and nothing reliable to suggest they pass WP:BAND or WP:GNG. Their show in Norway garnered them a few hits in the press there, but delivered nothing more substantial than being called "a prominent guest". Drmies (talk) 16:49, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Between the body of work, and the collaborations, we've given enough references (15 to be exact) to show and prove we are notable recording artist from New York CIty, we have a record on the radio, and have charted on Billboard, meaning we do have hits. We have proof for the charting, and have provided reliable sources for the song premiering on radio. Which have also been deleted. We were prominent guest and had an interview at the event representing New York City (2011 Nordic Ski Championship.) This reference is still there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newrichent (talk • contribs) 17:03, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That a song is on the radio doesn't make the band notable by our standards. The "we" you use suggests an involvement, which is clear also from the decidedly unencyclopedic tone of the article ("You can capture the love, pain and struggles the group witness while growing up in some of the most formidable neighborhood's of New York City", etc.). What charted on Billboard? And where's the evidence? Drmies (talk) 17:07, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * But we didn't only state we were on the radio the evidence for radio has been taken down, we have full MEDIABASE analyst to prove where we've charted and which radio stations in the United States have been and are still playing the single. I can email you this directly. We have FULL analyst for anything you need. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newrichent (talk • contribs) 17:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Again, it doesn't matter that a song was on the radio. If a single charted on something like Billboard there should be evidence of it in reliable, secondary sources. That evidence would help. Drmies (talk) 17:22, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * We have FULL mediabase information showing that the single charted at 146 on Urban (peaked at 120), has an audience of 1.15 million, and has over 200 plays nationwide and growing. Where can I email this information? Mediabase is on Wikipedia, so you should know who they are, and what they do. We get weekly reports, You want proof? Tell me where to send it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newrichent (talk • contribs) 17:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No response? Again, I have FULL reports from MEDIABASE, the website who monitors CHARTING on BILLBOARD, radio spins, where the song is getting played, who's playing the song, and where it's CHARTING. Let me know when and where to send this information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newrichent (talk • contribs) 17:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * "No response"--pardon me for not monitoring this every second. Don't email it anywhere: it's primary research. See WP:PRIMARY: an encyclopedia relies on secondary sources. Show us where, in a reliable source (WP:RS), this information was made available to the general public, so it can be cited in the article. And please sign your name under your posts (with four tildes), and see Indentation for proper indentation of comments so conversations can be more easily followed. Now, I shall shortly be away from this keyboard for an indeterminate amount of time; my apologies if I don't respond immediately to any comments. Drmies (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well we did cite it, our Power 105.1FM source has been taken down. I wonder why? Again, the proof is there, and they are public records that can be obtained by anyone with access to mediabase, for example I see French Montana has records that charted lower than us (first single to be exact) with no reliable sources, if you look Donny Goines or Smoke DZA or Joey Badass, these are artist who's never charted on Billboard, ever and all respectively have Wikipedia accounts, we have a bigger track record than them (so to speak, we're on Billboard!) and they've obtain a Wikipedia without being signed to a Major label. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newrichent (talk • contribs) 18:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This? What does that prove? Drmies (talk) 18:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Again you DON'T need Billboard information to be on Wikipedia, I've linked three 3 artist, who respectively have Wikipedia pages without anything CLOSE to our credentials. Smoke DZA, Joey Badass, and Donny Goines these 3 artist have been able to keep their pages without proving Billboard charting, or radio, but there are more, shall I continue dropping names? Or are you going to take down the entire underground Hip-Hop from Wikipedia? Because there are artist still trying to reach our accolades WITH Wikipedia pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newrichent (talk • contribs) 18:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Stop avoiding the question and focus, focus on the task at hand, which is saving your band's article. Don't worry about the other bands (WP:OTHERSTUFF). Start signing your messages, and start indenting properly. You're giving SineBot and me a headache. No, it is not necessary for a band to chart on Billboard, but for this band that seems to be the only chance since no one seems to have noticed their existence--at least not to the extent of writing about it in reliable sources. But this is going around in circles; I think we're done here. Drmies (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Definitely not going in circles, I've stated my claim, I've provided reliable sources, this is a PUBLIC website, and equal to all of the recording artist that need to be in MUSIC HISTORY, we are apart of music history, whether you care to believe it or not, you can't erase Billboard, you can't erase TIME, and you can't erase HISTORY, so most importantly you CAN NOT erase DA YOUNGFELLAZ! Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newrichent (talk • contribs) 18:46, 26 February 2013‎
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. — sparklism  hey! 14:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:MUSICBIO States, "2. Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." - THE GROUP HAS AND IS STILL CHARTING IN THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSIC CHARTS. MediaBase has this information for you to obtain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.27.86.57 (talk) 02:31, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:MUSICBIO States, "1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries." Here's a Norwegian Newspaper Article speaking on the group's trip to Norway to perform at the Nordic Ski Championship in front of the King and Queen. Dagbladet.no How much more proof does this band need? 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 11:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 08:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Citations provided that meet WP:MUSICBIO, however article appears to violate WP:CONFLICT DavidTTTaylor (talk) 15:57, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Appears to meet WP:MUSICBIO. But agree with DavidTTaylor above, needs to resolve WP:CONFLICT. Malke 2010 (talk) 20:03, 13 March 2013 (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.