Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Blakey (musician)


 * 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 as those !voting keep do not have policy or sourcing to back them up Star   Mississippi  02:10, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Michael Blakey (musician)

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

Deleted a long time ago at Articles for deletion/Michael Blakey (music producer), it is now recreated with new sources, but upon closer inspection it seems to be mostly nonsense, puffery, and other unverifiable stuff. He "has sold over 140 million albums" but is linked from not a single one on Wikipedia, and his Discogs page doesn't give the impression that this is true. He was a "Melody Maker Producer of the Year"? Repeated in vanity sources, but not in a single reliable source it seems, and unlikely considering his career as a producer. Should be deleted as a hoax, but isn't obvious enough to get a speedy without explanation I think. Fram (talk) 11:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Businesspeople,  and United Kingdom. Fram (talk) 11:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 21:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with nominator too. The sources are not adequate or reliable. We need more and better citations. Samanthany (talk) 00:15, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I've removed content that was not properly cited. I still believe that Blakey is notable. The point of creating a stub is that people can expand it using reliable sources in the future. I believe we should give it a chance for improvement before deleting it altogether. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.203.241.169 (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The two sources you kept are equally unreliable as the ones you removed though. "He provided the music for several television shows and films. Among them were the film “Shaft,” and “Jackass: The Movie.” " Too bad that his work on e.g. Jackass was "uncredited". "he was [sic!] produced tracks for some of the greatest artists in the world" including "No Doubt, Eminem, Willie Nelson, Engelbert Humperdinck, and many others.", but no one can tell which track he produced for e.g. Eminem or No Doubt, all sources just repeat the claim that he did. Fram (talk) 07:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I completely understand where you are coming from, however, it's my opinion that we should still give this stub a chance since Michael Blakey does have a long career. Having a stub will not eliminate the probabibility of other wiki contributors finding reliable resources and adding on to the page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.203.241.169 (talk) 16:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete After a bit of investigation, the man indeed has a long career with some sort of tangental connection to numerous notable artists/projects. But his exact role in each of these is unclear and--considering lack of independent RS--points towards functionary services rather than significant contributions. I'll add that he has an aggressive personal social media presence built around braggado and puffery. The original, deleted wiki page seemed to be an extension of this. I'm not sure what to make of this possibly good faith effort to recreate the deleted page by a third party, but--bottom line--there is still not enough genuine non-self promotional RS coverage to back up claims of notability. ShelbyMarion (talk) 13:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep As Blackey is a notable person, and he has a successful career as a musician and youtuber, this stub justified his work as credible.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WforWriter (talk • contribs) 00:00, 25 May 2022 (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.