Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Djanan Turan (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Tone 20:40, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Djanan Turan
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

still there is no prove of notability. the sources aren't reliable. fails WP:GNG Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  11:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  11:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions.  Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  11:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - Notable artist performing for decades. Plenty of sources. Article created as part of WIR (Women In Red) project to increase visibility of women on wikipedia through biographies and elsewhere. Please give tghe article time to grow instead of rushing to delete. Thanks Jo Dusepo (talk) 11:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 *  Weak Delete - The Women In Red project was meant to develop articles on women who are notable but nobody in Wikipedia ever did so due to the usual systemic bias or other oversights. Claiming that this noble effort justifies an article on any woman, regardless of her notability, is not particularly convincing. As for Djanan Turan, she has indeed been around for a long time but she has very little significant and reliable coverage in the music media. The best way to conduct a debate here would be to determine whether the one semi-magazine that has covered her, T-Vine, can be considered a reliable source. Unfortunately, that is still just one publication, and otherwise Turan is only present in reprinted press releases and brief concert announcements. I may change my vote in a positive direction if anyone can deliver any significant coverage in other languages that I may have missed. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 14:17, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I have changed my vote above from Weak Delete to simply Delete based on the convincing additional arguments made by GN-z11 below. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 13:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  D My Son  06:28, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: fails all criteria on WP:SINGER, available sources are either artist profiles on bot-run music sites, a few pages on sketchy online tabloids, or her page itself. The "time to grow" argument seems hopeless given there has been zero reporting about a recent release of hers. Not even any previously mentioned sources caught on it. The WIR project had an amazing cause but it does not justify creating articles for every woman whose name is seen online.  GN-z11  ☎  ★ 08:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Apparently a former nomination (albeit mostly lacked participation) deleted the article and it now was just re-created? I'm not an admin so I can't see the former version but this could be a CSD:G4. GN-z11  ☎  ★ 08:57, 20 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per Nom and GN-z11. I looked at the sources, and those available, and "Plenty of sources" is not a valid criteria. Yes, we always want more coverage of women on Wikipedia, but not at the expense of watering down notability requirements concerning WP:BLP's. A criteria is:  "reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", as well as "Use sources that directly support the material presented in an article and are appropriate to the claims made." That is where just listing "plenty of sources" can end up  being citation overkill. The numerous sources just do not tip the scales of notability. Working with another individual with questionalble notability is not a factor. Giving the article time to grow would be a good argument but in this case that would include giving notability time to grow which apparently hasn't happened in "Decades".  --  Otr500 (talk) 18:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 20:54, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 20:54, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 20:54, 21 July 2020 (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.