Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flash Rodriguez Music Executive


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 21:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Flash Rodriguez Music Executive

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails WP:BIO & WP:GNG. Has been speedy deleted 3 times at Flash Rodriguez. No secondary sources found in searches, just press releases, social networking sites, etc. Cptmurdok (talk) 00:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - THIS ARTICLE DOES MEET THE CRITERIA AND SHOULD STAND Flash Rodriguez is verified in numerous video clips listed in the references. In addition to appearing on numerous music media websites such as Global Grind and all hip hop.com. In addition, news stories linking him to celebrities and credits listed on fancast.com IMDB and the nytimes film page. I feel deletion is unwarranted and the page should stand as it does fit the criteria requirements. --Themusicinsider (talk) 00:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themusicinsider (talk • contribs) 00:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Highly recommend that this article remains, as it meets all required criteria. Article is factual and only contains biographical information and accomplishments in the entertainment industry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themusicinsider (talk • contribs) 00:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There are numerous independent sources listed in just the articles "REFERENCES" section, alone. Global Grind is NOT self-published. Also, video testimony from Grammy Award winning persons and celebrity executives are more than ample references. Please stop being so negative and let the article remain. It appears as if you have a personal vendetta. --Themusicinsider (talk) 01:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This article meets criteria!!! Subject of article is found on numerous independent website and media publications and celebrity websites. Subject of article also appears in online and literary publication "The Music Business Registry" by Ritch Esra. This publication lists all valid and credible music companies and executives. Subject of article is credible and relevant to his industry. Website is located at http://www.musicregistry.com/frame.html --Themusicinsider (talk) 00:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. The Music Registry is nothing more than a contact directory, per its own website. -C.Fred (talk) 01:06, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. It is a directory that verifies that the subject is a valid and legitimate executive in his industry, as that is the only explanation for him being listed therein. --Themusicinsider (talk) 01:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * All sources cited are self-published, press releases, or the like. The content is not verifiable with independent reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 00:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC) (!vote reclassified from delete to strong delete at 01:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC): see below.)


 * Delete No reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Does not meet the requirements set at WP:MUSIC.  I am concerned that this article keeps being recreated ... if it is being done by the same editor a block might be in order for disruption. Blueboar (talk) 00:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note that the creator of the Flash Rodriguez articles was blocked for a spam username. —C.Fred (talk) 00:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I also believe the previous page that was deleted was NOT a SPAM username, but was however an inexperienced editor who was deleted and editing without proper knowledge of the techniques. --Themusicinsider (talk) 01:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The reason listed for the deletion was a spam username or use of the account only for blatant advertisement. I'm just going by the logs. —C.Fred (talk) 01:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well this article is clearly not an advertisement or braggadocios. Please change your vote to KEEP the article.--Themusicinsider (talk) 01:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The subject of the article appears in images on numerous red carpets on wireimage, including music industry award ceremonies and is listed as CEO of The FEAM Group.--Themusicinsider (talk) 01:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong delete. After looking at the references cited in the article currently, the best I'm coming up with for a claim of notability is "Flash Rodriguez worked in the Camera Crew on the TV show Diddy Runs the City." Clearly short of WP:BIO and WP:GNG. The testimonial from Ephren Taylor, btw, is published by the YouTube account named FlashRodriguez, so it's right back into the realm of self-published and dubious independence. —C.Fred (talk) 01:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * It is clear that you have some type of personal issue with this article. So are you saying that a world renowned Executive was forced to make that public statement? You are also selectively disregarding the independent media coverage such as http://www.ihiphop.com/?p=47985, http://hhnlive.com/news/more/731 , http://www.ballerstatus.com/2005/08/05/publicity-stunt-accusations-against-vida-guerra-are-false-says-her-rep/


 * Ironically none of these stories are SELF PUBLISHED!!! --Themusicinsider (talk) 01:40, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * iHipHop appears to be a blog, per its FAQ; it's not clear it qualifies as reliable. It's not clear what HHNLive is. Baller Status appears to be reliable. However, all that article says is that Rodriguez owns Flash Records, and he and his company are being sued by Vida Guerra. Further, the link to Baller Status was not in the article, and still isn't at this time. —C.Fred (talk) 01:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - Please !vote only once. After your "keep" or "delete" post, everything else is a comment.  I've reformatted the entries above to remove extraneous !votes. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - per C.Fred. A diligent search of Google & Google News found no mention of this person in reliable sources.  All quoted sources are connected to the subject (press releases, etc.), so there is no third-party information on notability, and as a BLP having no reliable sources is a major problem.  Even if it were to survive this AfD, it more than likely would eventually be stubbified because of BLP concerns. If it weren't a BLP, I'd suggest that it be userfied until some reliably sourced information becomes available. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:09, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - You just stated that you did a Google Search and Google News search, if that's true then you would have found all of the referenced articles, which are not press release driven. These articles are interviews and editorials. This article should NOT be deleted, as it is regarding a credible music executive who is notable and relevant in his industry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Themusicinsider (talk • contribs) 03:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If he is notable, then there should be some record of it. A few press releases and blog entries and such are not an indication of notability, and your repetition that they are will not make it so. I believe it's quite clear to everyone here that you believe that article should be kept, so it's not necessary to repeat it over and over again.  It's obviously not changing anyone's opinion, and it's not going to influence the closing admin's evaluation of the arguments made, which is based on Wikipedia's policies – so, please, give it a rest.  My evaluation is that the subject of this article has not been shown to be notable, and the only thing that is going to change that is some coverage in reliable sources. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:MUSIC and WP:V.  The current "references" do not meet WP:SOURCES.  Wyatt Riot (talk) 07:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails the relevant criteria; not enough WP:RS. Shadowjams (talk) 07:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete; blogs and YouTube videos are not reliable or acceptable sources for an encyclopedia article. Bearcat (talk) 21:27, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete pretty much per nom. Drmies (talk) 17:35, 30 April 2010 (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.