Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Jeddman


 * 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. Salvio giuliano 10:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Daniel Jeddman

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

Non-notable musician, largely sourced to religious-themed websites, somewhat PROMO. No charted singles, few if any mentions otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 01:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 01:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Daniel Jeddman is a notable muscian. He is not affiliated to any kind of promotions. All attached links are authentic and genuine. Kindly do your research well with facts. Blackan007 (talk) 11:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It’s clearly stated he’s soon going to release a book. It was never stated he is an author, but an upcoming. This criticism is not factual. Blackan007 (talk) 11:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


 * And I believe if client in discussion is not famous, there would not be related searches below his article. Don't forget he was successful with his project "Favour" with Ghana VGMA Awards winner, MOG Music. Blackan007 (talk) 11:17, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I stand to correct, Ghanaweb.com is not a religious affiliated website but i see a reference point there. Your statement is not entirely correct. Daniel Jeddman i know is known both in Ghana and in many parts of Europe especially in the diaspora in Germany. Grun Berry (talk) 17:18, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete: Some of us know he has more than one album! I dont know why the editor wrote only one. I may have to crosscheck or reseach to add what is missing. Grun Berry (talk) 17:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete: Has apparently released exactly one album, and Wikipedia is not where you go to get signed for another. Creator also admitted to writing in exchange for payment, and refers to the subject as their client in edit summaries.  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 01:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's pretty much promotional then. Oaktree b (talk) 14:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually not promotional. I would have stated emphatically. Knowing how versatile he is in music, both in Europe and Africa, confidently asked me to assist him publish. There was true nothing to do with promotion. Daniel Jeddman is already verified on Facebook, Youtube and Google (Knowledge Panel). Kindly check attached links on article. He definitely ain't here to show off. But to add to the great work of Wikipedia. Blackan007 (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I stand to correct kindly, Daniel Jeddman has two albums to his credits. Daniel Jeddman is a notable Ghanaian gospel artist registered under the Ghana Gospel Music Industry and in Germany as well. Blackan007 (talk) 14:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, so it's two albums. And a conflict of interest. Why does this even require discussion? The use of phrases like "on behalf of my client" should be CSD all by themselves. That, and the fact that you admit you're getting paid, but insist it's "nothing to do with promotion".  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 03:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Paying someone to edit is promotion, not sure how else it can be explained. Oaktree b (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2023 (UTC)


 * And an admitted paid editor removing a COI template on their "client"'s article? Not a good look.  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 04:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * And they removed it again, after telling me they were going to stop editing.  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 08:05, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Whatever they want to achieve to succeed will not be well. Because subject in discussion is not definitely not here for fame. What is wrong for an editor to post the achievements and progress of a notable ghanaian artist? I simply don't understand. Experience in a field also need etiquitte to match up with. The page is non–promotional! However, I'm not touching page ever again. Will just have to focus on others now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackan007 (talk • contribs) 01:57, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article is overwhelmingly promotional, and I suspect that it is intended to draw attention to his ministry. In the argument above, the article's supporter needs to understand that this is an encyclopedia in which a person must qualify for an article that will benefit the interested reader. Wikipedia is not meant to be a repeat of a person's own websites, social media accounts, and press releases that are already plastered all over the Internet. Let the gentleman continue his relentless efforts out there. For Wikipedia's purposes, he has no significant or reliable coverage for his music or other endeavors. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 13:54, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I feel so embarassed reading this. I may have brought this sort of ridicule upon myself against an innocent gospel artist. Allowing people to feed on him publicly against his name and integrity. I am as strict as you are. But my observations are quite different than yours. I don't know how to put it again really. But the simple truth is, subject is A NOTABLE PUBLIC FIGURE, and as an editor I did my research to publish which I noted clearly on my Talk page without hestitation. And yes I was given a sum to publish and not to promote.
 * The judgement you are all passing seems rather intruiging and not fact based. Why will an editor attempt to publish an article of a non-notable figure. I least expected these kinds of responses. I thought correcting article, cites and others would have been the matters to discuss. Needless to say, it is all well however you want to take it Doom. Blackan007 (talk) 02:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete - Why because editor is not observing COI! There is definitely a misconception here without proper assessment. I STANT TO CORRECT, there is no breach of rules here. Kindly do your research as a professional and a experienced as you are. Don't read comments to declare a stand. That is not noteworthy nor expected to declare a stand.
 * Blackan007 (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete – The article is totally far from promotional. It's rather sad to see editors feed and validate on the page as prey to feed on for days. Suspecting something just has to do with your thoughts and no matter how you think, the truth remains the same. The page is NOT PROMOTIONAL. I don't know what have become of some of the editors of Wikipedia, but I hope the main administrators of this platform are observing. I took some time also to check other pages from same editors against the page in discussion and notice they use the same force and aggression to either sabotage, discriminate or deced against religious believes that is clearly against the policies of Wikipedia.
 * You can't vote more than once. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 18:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per doomsdayer520's reasoning. This is at best a case of WP:TOOSOON. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I suggest article is moved to Draftspace for corrections Blackan007 (talk) 17:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * You did that, and then moved it back three minutes later. What was the point exactly?  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 21:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand your point. I’ve been just confused, depressed, discouraged and low in confidence regarding the situation I’ve met here. I probably shouldn’t have gone forward to take this task. Maybe this place is not for me or seniors should be a bit considerate and tolerant about their juniors.
 * Those who fall hard mostly rise great.
 * Sumanuil. Thanks anyways Blackan007 (talk) 10:33, 18 March 2023 (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.