Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Innocent (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.  Sandstein  18:41, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Jason Innocent
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a non-notable artist, as per my source analysis below. It is unfortunately the product of a massive SEO/paid publication ploy to try and legitimize non-notable people and businesses by flooding google and other sites (like Wikipedia) with paid for PR.

Praxidicae (talk) 16:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete The sources all appear to be paid promotion. Even the respectable Seattle PI source is a republished item from something called "blogcritics.org". GNG fail based on non-independent sources.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, with such a stringent approach to sources, one can effectively delete 80% of the modern street artists. I don't have any special opinion about Innocent but my point is that street art notability has its specifics. Here is a couple of tattoo artists, you can easily put on deletion discussion list: Myra Brodsky, Corey Miller (tattoo artist) - the sources are of the same kind and I can't see what is more "notable" in them in comparison with miserable Jason Innocent. You can either call all this art non notable "trash" and "bullshit artists" (I'm kind of in favor it, honestly) or set up more obvious standards. I also propose to establish Wikipedia Art Inquisition Committee and let Praxidicae be the Grand Inquisitor in the best traditions of Tomás de Torquemada. It is not even a sarcasm, it looks like we are getting there...--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:554B:2E1D:AE38:D5DF (talk) 02:03, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry we have enough common sense to see through your poor attempt to flood the internet with paid for vanity spam, but I'm glad we can both agree that this type of dubious, deceptive bullshit doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Praxidicae (talk) 12:34, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Praxidicae, you are amazing. It seems you start attacking everyone who disagrees with your opinion=)) - this is really works as a automatically with you. All I want to say - I disagree with 50% of your work because you are to fast to judge and delete and I saw a lot of speedy deletions contested on your talk page. Your approach is always see negative side of every case this why Wikipedia is becoming "better". I'd give an artist a page anytime over thousands of Wikipedia pages for small shops, "internet celebrities" and influencers. And I couldn't care less about Jason Innocent but I find your approach (over and over again) close to the methods I detailed in my previous comment. Good luck with deleting, Mrs. Grand Inquisitor=))--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:68C1:643D:947C:438C (talk) 19:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you're unaware, IP but this is a discussion about the article, not me. If you want to bring up my behavior or edits WP:ANI is the place to do it. Praxidicae (talk) 19:34, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:17, 9 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete — “Stringent approach to sources” of course! is doing the right thing else we risk our exclusivity & become LinkedIn. Agree with nom, no coverage in reliable sources independent of them could be observed. Celestina007 (talk) 01:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Clear analysis done by Prax, not more could be said, other than a delete for this one. Delta fiver (talk) (UTC) 17:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Devoke water   (talk)  14:16, 15 October 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.