Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maye (singer)


 * 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 no consensus. Three relists later and we are no closer. No prejudice towards a re-nomination in the coming months if desired by an editor. Daniel (talk) 00:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Maye (singer)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't seem to qualify any guidelines for WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG. This was moved directly from draft space to main space with notability concerns. Best will be to debate it at AFD. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:24, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:24, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:24, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Venezuela-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:28, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no issue with moving it back to draft space. I think she is an upcoming pop star, seeing as her songs are getting several streams and celebrities like Barack Obama commented on her music, but if she is not notable yet then moving it back to draft space can work. Jaguarnik (talk) 17:26, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The Rolling Stones article is big and she has had a number of other coverage of her album and tours. Her album was released on one of the major Indie labels and is listed on a number of articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FiddleheadLady (talk • contribs) 18:19, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * For example, she has coverage from CNN(perhaps I should have put that in the article), Rolling Stone, Billboard, several big Latin American magazines like Indie Rocks! and Cusica. This fulfills the guideline for "multiple independent publications": "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself." Jaguarnik (talk) 23:22, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment Very well. I request the participants to please present the sources here that they are referring to. Thank you. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 04:01, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Here is CNN:|CNN, Rolling Stone:, Billboard: , , Indie Rocks , Cusica . Again, if it's felt that her notability isn't enough, the article can be moved back to drafts. Jaguarnik (talk) 05:43, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 05:51, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 05:51, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment I am getting an error at CNN article. Can you help me provide the link again? Thought on others below:


 * 1) Very interviewish. Can count for WP:BASIC at best.
 * 2) - Part of Obama's list, as wonderful as it is, won't contribute anything to notability as such since it doesn't discusses why or how it made it to the list. This would be trivial mention.
 * 3) - Announcement. I won't count it contributing towards anything at all.
 * 4) - Doesn't seem to be a reliable source. I translated and read it. It's basically an interview. Whatever is outside double quotes is also what the subject is telling the journalist. There is zero independent comment of her work.
 * 5) Doesn't seem to be something that we could count as a reliable source

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Here is the cnn link: https://www.cnn.com/videos/spanish/2019/06/21/showbiz-maye-cantante-venezuela-my-love-musica.cnn . The Rolling Stone article doesn't seem that much of an interview (while it does have her comments in them); most of the article seems to be about her life and career. Jaguarnik (talk) 17:55, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * The CNN is also an interview. The one paragraph here is not written in a way that it can even contribute to WP:BASIC. I differ with you on Rolling Stones. I would say 'some' is about her work and career and 'most' is about what she is saying. Being daughter of a notable artist can easily get her all this media edge and interviews. But since there is zero to little reception of her work, I won't see it qualifying notability for now. It may become notable in future of course. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:28, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Then may I put the article back in drafts for the time being? Jaguarnik (talk) 03:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Jaguarnik, This was already draftified and you brought it back. Ideally, it shouldn't be draftified again and should either exist in mainspace or be deleted, but I am not sure if that's a mandatory policy. Let's wait for the opinion of other editors and decide accordingly. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:53, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm a new editor, I made an error of judgement. But I truly believe that she will become notable later on. Jaguarnik (talk) 04:04, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree, Jaguarnik (talk.  I think it's just a bit early. I will keep my eyes open for more coverage. You did a great job with the formatting, the content, and maintaining neutrality. I too hope you stick around!  Please ping me if you need any help.  JSFarman (talk) 16:59, 3 July 2021 (UTC)


 * That's okay Jaguarnik! We all make mistakes. I hope this won't mean you will leave the project and I hope you will continue editing Wikipedia. About her being notable in future, whenever you think it has happened, you can create it again. But would be good to first ask at WP:TEA or from any other experienced editor to ensure that notability is being met. Otherwise, all of us will have to do this same unpleasant dance again. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 09:17, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Non-notable singer does not satisfy WP:NSINGER. And as per above references discussion.GermanKity (talk) 09:06, 1 July 2021 (UTC

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 19:37, 12 July 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 23:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment uh oh looks this will be a big debatable battle Esaïe Prickett (talk) 19:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠</b> 06:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Being the focus of an article in Rolling Stone definitely counts toward notability. Pretty much all music articles which aren't reviews include quotes or anecdotes from the singer. It doesn't make the source itself unreliable if its written by a journalist and published by a reputable publication. The other articles also help to contribute to notability. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:54, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, you are right that anecdotes and quotes don't make them unreliable. But they do have an impact on independence of the source which is just as important as reliability (one might even argue it's more!). The challenge is journalists not writing any opinion of their own and simply rewriting what is being told. Such articles, even if written by a journalist, are questionable in terms of independence. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:09, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * True, but it does seem like the existence of the article demonstrates notability. Journalists who write for publications like Rolling Stone can cover a wide range of artists, and they usually don't cover just anybody. Being "worthy" of a feature there indicates to me that the publication assigns some notability to them. BuySomeApples (talk) 18:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Hey, very interesting point. But I think publication assigning notability is not same as Wiki notability. Publications may choose to cover whomsoever for whatever reasons - that remains not our concern. The subject may have connections or some PR pull because of which she might have got the coverage. Irrespective, we should follow our own guidelines in which independence is of utmost importance. Let's see how others feel about it. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 10:37, 3 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. The Rolling Stone article is heavily edited and has additional commentary between the quotes. I also feel being listed as one of Barack Obama's favourite songs should count for something. NemesisAT (talk) 23:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.