Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ishell Vaughan


 * 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. ✗ plicit  04:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Ishell Vaughan

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

Possible UPE, created initial with junk SEO blog references, moved to draft but than moved back into mainspace. No visible pass of WP:GNG or WP:NMUSICIAN. nearlyevil 665  18:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  nearlyevil  665  18:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:37, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Look, the article doesn't go against the politics of significance. It is as short as possible, no advertising or anything like that. There could be more references, but there are no forbidden black hats here. Just an article about a person. There are works with famous musicians and links to them. Why this article does not belong on Wikipedia I do not understand. Ilyadante (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)ilyadan
 * It's unwise to move draft articles on people of questionable notability out of Draft space before they get the Articles for Creation stamp of approval. They are often subject to speedy deletion but here you can argue why this article should be kept and you have some time to improve the article. Liz Read! Talk! 01:42, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee  //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 20:31, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, tried to give the author a chance to improve this in draft. None of the material supports even basic biographical information. I was unable to find anything additional; most hits are PR or blogs. Please note that subjects do not inherent the notability of people they may or may not have worked with. Kuru   (talk)  21:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - would probably have been wise to leave it in draft and go through AfC, where experienced editors could have helped develop it. But this does smell a bit of UPE/COI editing, so that could be the impetus of forcing it into the mainspace. Fails WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 22:41, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:GNG, in-depth coverage in Vocal along with coverage in WRDE, Daily Voice, HotNewHipHop (1st), (2nd), and XXL Magazine. They possibly also pass WP:DIRECTOR bullet 3. Merkedeke (talk) 17:14, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth: Vocal - User-generated blog. Not reliable; WRDE - dead link. Unable to find original; Daily Voice - unreliable site, also only mention of the subject's name, not SIGCOV; HotNewHipHop - Trivial mention, unreliable blog-like site; XXL Magazine - no SIGCOV, just a promotional-sounding video clip announcement; WP:DIRECTOR bullet 3 - Highly unlikely. nearlyevil  665  17:54, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

I just found something interesting. Absolutely the same articles, clearly created in order to inflate a character out of nothing. If you look at the original article, it becomes ridiculous, he worked in collaboration with BMW, Lamborgini ... Very funny. If I have Calvin Klein underpants, does that mean I work with Calvin Klein?Faskat (talk) 05:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Faskat
 * Delete - no serious third party coverage. Refs read like paid publicity pieces.-KH-1 (talk) 06:20, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article is clearly created by a paid author. All sources are paid. Definitely this character should not be on Wikipedia Faskat (talk) 04:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Faskat


 * 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.