Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luieville


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:12, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Luieville

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another promo feature by constructed from search engine dribs and drabs. In a dazzling departure from convention, moved into mainspace not with the usual revealing "I want it it to show on Google", but with "This article has independent sources and also sources that clearly talks about it." Let's have a look:


 * promotional article, a press release by their promotion management firm. Meagre as it is, it's the best source present - which is probably why it appears in no less than three versions in this sorry list.
 * passing mention
 * passing mention
 * passing mention
 * advertorial
 * same as #1
 * same as #1
 * , - passing mentions
 * IMDB entry
 * ,, , , , , , , , , - passing mentions
 * commentary- and criteria-less listing in non-notable "Music videos of the year" list

In other words, the editor still has no idea what constitutes sufficient biographical coverage, and continues to throw out what appear to be commissioned advertorials, hoping that one sticks. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:55, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:27, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:27, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Shale https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renan_Faccini https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_AD
 * Comment Before I start writing a biography I do go through other Wikipedia biography article and see how it is written and the type of references they use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessy_Terrero
 * And my articles is better than all this with reliable sources too but an article like Jessy Terrero couldn't figure out any reliable source but still, yet it wasn't tagged for deletion. Luieville name is already on Wikipedia in some wiki page of artists he worked with and you still say he is not notable. Elmadae what's your aim do you want me to stop writing articles or do you want to correct and help me.(Ziggy 2milli (talk) 06:30, 30 March 2019 (UTC))
 * The way you are going - horking up one abysmally sourced promo feature after the other - I'd honestly settle for you to just stop. You do not seem to take anything on board from the numerous deletion discussions that your articles have engendered so far. - As for your role model articles, the sourcing of Christopher Shale is miles above anything you have ever provided (and if you can't see the difference that's an obvious problem), and some of the others (especially Victor AD) might well have to come in for some additional scrutiny. If you aim for the lowest acceptable standard, you are bound to run into issues. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:29, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as Elmidae's analysis shows none of these sources add up to N. --Theredproject (talk) 00:18, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG. Its about the quality and reliability of sourcing, not how many are used in the article. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:10, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - article has been moved to Draft:Luieville by its creator. ansh 666 20:52, 1 April 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.