Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lanie Banks


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 16:38, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Lanie Banks

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Advertorialized WP:BLP of a musician with no properly sourced claim of notability per WP:NMUSIC. The references here are nearly all primary sources that are not support for notability, such as Google search results and online music stores and YouTube videos and directory entries on MusicBrainz or streaming platforms -- and the only one that's even semi-reliable (Watchdog Uganda) isn't verifying anything about him that would pass NMUSIC, so it doesn't magically get him over GNG all by itself as the only non-terrible source in play. Bearcat (talk) 15:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 15:45, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Firstly, please read all reliable references, secoundly Let us agree that google is the number one search engine and reference source website.so basing on that fact i would like to suggest if an entry such as this one has a google knowledge graph card or google knowledge panel it means they have impacted on society and thus their is no denying notability,and lets face the fact that wikipedia is a place for factual verifiable information and reason and not a battle field where young editors fight old editors no,so my standpoint is keep the article because whats the use deleting an article that is notable and only to be re created later by other editors, remember that entries about living notable people evolve with time and are often updated by editors on wikipedia read further about music here WP:MUSIC Elizabethfoundationn (talk) 15:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Not a single thing stated in the article passes WP:NMUSIC, and not a single reference present in the article is a reliable source — Google search results are not evidence of notability in and of themselves, as they'll find any page that has his name in it whether it's a reliable source or not. To consider him notable enough for a Wikipedia article, we need to see journalism being done about him by media outlets, not blogs or streaming platforms or YouTube videos or online music stores where he was able to put himself. Bearcat (talk) 16:55, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

This article was improved, and i can see you are not reading sources and you are only just focussed on getting the article deleted instead of determining if the article can be improved further or even has room for improvement. Thirdly, another reminder is reliable sources differ according to the country and location of the subject for example dont expect an egyptian personallity to be covered by the same sources as americans or russians personalities etc. plus they are no youtube videos as claimed.and lastly wikipedia rules are added and amended each day so keep track. And yes media outlets have covered this subject including television have covered this subject multiple times but most times videos are not reliable sources.so i wont link those sources Elizabethfoundationn (talk) 15:04, 22 June 2019 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizabethfoundationn (talk • contribs) 14:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No, we wouldn't expect a Ugandan musician to be getting coverage in American newspapers or magazines, but that's not what I said we need: I said we need real media, and Africa has real media. We do not have a rule that our sources have to be published in North America or Europe to be valid — but what a source does have to be, regardless of where it's published, is a reliable source media outlet that is independent of the subject's own self-published marketing. So we don't extend non-Western countries an exemption from having to cite reliable sources, or an entitlement to park an African musician's notability on his own self-published primary source public relations bumf instead of citing real media: to get a Wikipedia article, a musician has to be properly sourceable to real media, and African countries still have real media. So African musicians do not need special exemptions from having to be properly sourceable just because they're not getting into American newspapers or magazines very often, because Africa has newspapers and magazines too.
 * And no, you can't get an article kept by just saying that the subject has media coverage you aren't citing — anybody can say that about literally anything, even if they're actually lying. To get an article kept on the basis of media coverage, you do have to show the media coverage you're talking about, so that we can evaluate its reliability and depth and range and volume and context. We don't keep articles just because somebody says there's media coverage they didn't use, because people can and do make inaccurate claims about that: we evaluate the sources that people show. Bearcat (talk) 15:17, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Check this list of all african>ugandan notable personalities which include potical leaders and musicians in this database If you are still arguing after you read this then i dont have anything else to say to you. I always edit wikipedia in my free time ,otherwise i have other things to do as a woman Elizabethfoundationn (talk) 13:23, 23 June 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizabethfoundationn (talk • contribs) 12:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Firstly, that is a user-generated database to which anybody can add anybody they want, even themselves. That is not evidence of notability; it's evidence of self-promotion. Notability derives from media coverage, and nothing else.
 * Secondly, new comments in this discussion go at the bottom of the page, not the top, and you do not have any right to blank the rest of the discussion so that your newest comment is the only thing left on the page: you are allowed to comment in the discussion, but you must leave the rest of the discussion in place. I have had to repair this page literally every single time you've ever edited it at all, because you followed improper format — and you're getting dangerously close to receiving a temporary editblock for being disruptive if I have to keep doing that again. You add new comments at the bottom of this page, not at the top, and you are not allowed to erase so much as one comma of anything that's been posted to this page by anybody else. Bearcat (talk) 13:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Per the nom. Clearly fails WP:NMUSIC and any notability guideline. Given the unnessesary difficulties they've had to put up with in this AfD, I'd like to thank Bearcat for their dedication to seeing this process through to the end properly. Newshunter12 (talk) 06:40, 25 June 2019 (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.