Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mista Grimm


 * 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.  Sandstein  20:53, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Mista Grimm

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Mista_Grimm Globalmario (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2015 (UTC)globalmario


 * Delete. Unclear if artist is notable. Regardless, there is very little information about this artist, as the only external source is through the website allmusic in which does not provide any evidence at all.  There isn't any information about being charted.  Furthermore, all other internal wiki links have very little information about this artist.  The internal links have various claims of being charted, but do not have any sources either.  Sadly, there isn't any proof. Does not meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:GNG. Globalmario (talk) 17:40, 26 September 2015 (UTC)  SwisterTwister   talk  05:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)}}


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 September 26.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 18:00, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Indo Smoke maybe instead of deleting, if that single is independently notable as it seems he is best known for this and News, Books and highbeam all immediately found links including from that time so he got attention but there's nothing to suggest better improvement. SwisterTwister   talk  05:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: There is nothing showing that the single is notable. Maybe I'm missing something?  Please feel free to let me know.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Globalmario (talk • contribs) 15:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)  Globalmario (talk) 15:30, 27 September 2015 (UTC)globalmario
 * Keep. Good charting. (around 300,000 sold). Adding to the Vibe source already in the article, coverage in  -    -    -  . Includes mainstream coverage from as far away as Australia. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Looking at the source, there are two small articles(a sentence or two) stating some information about Mista Grimm and him being a co-publisher with 3 or more people, among hundreds of other artists. I am not convinced these would establish him being notable.  Furthermore,  there aren't any other sources besides his connections to other Wikipedia pages.  Also, I am not exactly sure what it was meant by 300,000 sold, is there a source that shows something of his was sold 300,000 times?  I'm also unsure if he did anything by-himself or only material with others.Globalmario (talk) 14:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)globalmario
 * Rubbish. "stating some information about Mista Grimm and him being a co-publisher with 3 or more people, among hundreds of other artists". Nope, the two linked are single reviews. As for the 300,000. Try actually reading the source already in the article. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:33, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per Duffbeerforme as appears to meet WP:NPERSON. --Rubbish computer 11:15, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and SwisterTwister. Nothing on the search engines show that this artist meets WP:GNG, WP:NMUSIC, or WP:BIO. Citations provided by the editor above do not rise to the level of in-depth coverage necessary to establish notability.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:43, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Onel5969. How do the The Orange County Register and The Age sources "not rise to the level of in-depth coverage necessary"? Have you seen them? duffbeerforme (talk) 04:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:17, 12 October 2015 (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.