Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric the Prince


 * 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. Discounting the sockpuppetry. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:13, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Eric the Prince

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:NMUSIC. An earlier revision of this article was nominated per CSD A7, however the creator has removed the tag and expanded the article greatly from the version nominated for speedy, thus why I am sending this to AfD over replacing the speedy tag. sandgemADDICT yeah? 02:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. FallingGravity (talk) 02:36, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

As the creator I am asking that any discrpencies be put here, and the matter be resolved - anything that needs to be changed please let me know, I am creating Wikipedia's for about 150 independent artists around the country and this is the first one, my personal one, so please let me know EXACTLY what I need to do in order to make sure that absolutely none of the pages I post even get considered for "speedy deletion." Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RapAuthority (talk • contribs) 02:45, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. WP:COI piece, promotional intent. Article's author appears to be using two accounts now. 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:17, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Make that three.  sixty nine   • speak up •  06:11, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:MUSIC and WP:GNG completely with nothing found in a Google search. Edited out promotional content in the article anyway. sixty nine   • speak up •  04:52, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep.. Notable and all sourced have been checked. --Hatchmight (talk) 06:00, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes all major criteria but needs some rework and additional material. Tag for now. Choicerpex (talk) 06:05, 5 February 2016 (′UTC)

*Keep.. Notable and it all checks out, glad to have him on Wikipedia. --weshouldworktogetherbecause (talk)
 *  has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and AFD. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 07:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * !vote stricken per outcome of Sockpuppet investigations/Erictheprince --bonadea contributions talk 19:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep.. looks good to me. --lifeguard5770 (talk)
 *  has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and AFD. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 07:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * !vote stricken per outcome of Sockpuppet investigations/Erictheprince --bonadea contributions talk 19:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - the article currently makes no claim to meet WP:NMUSIC and I cannot find any sources that would help towards that, or towards WP:GNG. Editor(s) arguing in favour of keeping the article are invited to follow the link to WP:NMUSIC and explain how the person meets it. --bonadea contributions talk 08:27, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete utterly fails WP:GNG 96.237.20.21 (talk) 15:21, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment I think this may fit speedy deletion criteria A7, or at least on the edge. 96.237.20.21 (talk) 15:21, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Clause #7 "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability."
 * Edits are being made that verify, a new update with cited sources will be added that match the criteria. Aloha.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.17.157 (talk) 11:12, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as advertising, very possibly with conflict of interest. The current sources are entirely inadequate to demonstrate notability. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as advertising or move to Draft space with an AfC tag, and self-declared effort to use Wikipedia to promote his interviews with musicians. The editor creating these articles seems to have a good heart but doesn't understand Wikipedia and as result is abusing it.  We need to delete these and have him put them through AFC both for COI reasons and so he can learn what a Wikipedia article is and is not... Jytdog (talk) 20:47, 5 February 2016 (UTC) (modifying - moving these ourselves to AfC would show him how he should be working. Jytdog (talk) 22:35, 5 February 2016 (UTC))
 * The article is autobiography as RapAuthority wrote here Jytdog (talk) 22:47, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment There is a sockpuppet investigation underway here. --bonadea contributions talk 08:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

None of these statements in the article have anything to do with promotion, advertising or anything like that it is simply to show the references and citations needed for clauses, notability in Hawaii there is a the local scene of Hawaii Hip Hop as an artist, a huge amount of things that have been done in my life, I should have a Wikipedia page and people can edit it and add things, yes I am notable, and yes I am referencing things and I am creating Wikipedia's for notable people in the rap/hip hop industry who don't have one because 'no one is motivated to create one for them' there's a lot of bullshit in the music industry that people make up to do deals, managers, and not enough reliable third party sources to verify their sources right away with one quick search and in turn many people get screwed over therefore this is not only a safety issue for people but it is a passion to MindMap for me, I use mind mapping software all the time and the Wikipedia is the best mind mapping software out there, as I said, page meets notability, that's not an issue, I put the links and statements to show that it does and how it meet the clause, now that the links are there that prove the clause is met then they say it's advertisement, however and have more third party resources and there are others editing this now and if you people who have a heart to do articles for creation on it because it will take some time to build I was just so upset about it because people were judging too soon, those not passionate about hip hop won't find these people notable even if they do meet the clauses, secondly I have plenty of references to add and if there is a way it can be placed into Articles for Creation as more citations are added and then 'legally' moved back into Wikipedia main database after a few other of these honest and supportive moderators in this discussion can help with doing some research and helping add verifiable sources thus helping me see exactly how I need to create these articles for new producers and artists to be added to Wikipedia the right way and allowing me to teach managers how to do it effectively for their artists when their artist meets the criteria because the Wikipedia portal is very important for credibility. So I appreciate the help and want to also be a reference and a third party source that Wikipedia users can reference from as Rap.com is an authority on Rap music and as we are conducting interviews with peoople to find out if they meet the notability clauses in Wikipedia we are finding lots of talented people who know one knew about that now have a place of honor and all of their stories are fact checked and verified. And no accounts are sock puppets or meat puppets and no other accounts are associated to me they are family members. So I am just here to begin a process of clearing up a lot in the music industry because I believe in you guys, and in use Wikipedia's genius and beautiful way of defining truth and it's incredible community of moderators 15:48, 6 February 2016 (UTC)RapAuthority There are several interviews that are being cited and performance announcements each thing being added over the next few days so please allow some time for additional material that way this can be finished and I can move on to interviewing more artists, producers and music people to see if they meet notability requirements and will know exactly what needs to be on the article and I'll be able to build it for a while in the text pad so when I upload it to Wikipedia and it will be set and good to go. And as I am in conversations with many major artists I will be able to add unique information to Wikipedia the normal person wouldn't be able to find out and I'll know what needs to be found and referenced before any new information is added. This is very important because more business being conducted on truth in the music industry is what we need and Wikipedia's system is the best there is which is why doing this work anywhere else is nothing like being a contributor to this magnificent website and community 15:31, 6 February 2016 (UTC)RapAuthority — Preceding unsigned comment added by RapAuthority (talk • contribs)
 * Notability is not inherited. Even if you have worked with notable people, it does not automatically make you notable, and the article still doesn't make any actual claim to notability per WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. As you surely realise, the person who claims to be the subject of an article can never be the final arbiter of their own notability for Wikipedia's purposes - that would completely defeat the purpose of Wikipedia. This is not the place to discuss any other articles you might want to create, but before you start doing that, please have a look at Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the policy on original research which will tell you why you cannot use your own research as sources in a Wikipedia article. --bonadea contributions talk 17:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ...and now RapAuthority has been indefinitely blocked for abusing multiple accounts, including lifeguard5770 and weshouldworktogetherbecause. --bonadea contributions talk 19:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete, I have no idea what Hatchmight meant by saying the sources "have been checked", but the vast majority are not reliable, including YouTube, iTunes and Instagram. Others do not mention Eric the Prince. The only reliable third-party source in the article is misrepresented and says nothing about Eric Schaefere except that he "delivers pizzas for a living". That's not enough for an encyclopedia article about him. Huon (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as none of this suggests better satisfying the applicable notability. SwisterTwister   talk  21:42, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep give it a few days as all sources are being found and Wikipedia's rules are being checked, I have several people looking into the matter, if there's a way we can move this to Articles for Creation, there is a lot of print advertising that has not been yet uploaded to the internet with promotional flyers and as you can also see, there is an article here: https://www.zoho.com/crm/blog/running-multiple-businesses-crm-platform.html that says plenty more about the time after delivering pizza. The bottom line is this, I didn't read where you couldn't write an article about yourself, and I did it for the purposes of know what references are acceptable, I figured I know more about me than anyone I can interview so if I can pass the check then I can write articles about others and find out exactly what causes Notability.  I simply don't want this page to be deleted indefinitely, if the moderator can be so kind as to move this to a temporary area where the article can be editted by third parties who can find the information online and write about it given the reference above and other references that are now being uploaded to the internet, then I would appreciate it, and I will abide by all Wikipedia rules and now I know exactly what you guys are looking for and what Wikipedia demands so I can ask the producers and artists the right questions and find out if they qualify for a Wikipedia page or not.  I hope that make sense, I came to Wikipedia to write articles on artists and producers and to learn how to do that I wrote an article on myself, now that it's written and up for debate I want to make sure that it isn't deleted for life, but that it is moved to a special section where third parties can edit it to the point where it is acceptable and the notability proof can be accepted by everyone and it is moved to the proper category as I am learning how this all works.  Much love and Aloha from Hawaii, thanks guys. 75.80.192.81 (talk) 13:06, 9 February 2016 (UTC)RapAuthority
 * Please could you stop filibustering - you are writing a lot of words but have provided no reliable sources at all, which is all that matters. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:35, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete One self-released album fails WP:MUSIC. John Nagle (talk) 23:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * We seem to have a SNOW DELETE here, barring the various socks. Could somebody please close? Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:45, 12 February 2016 (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.