Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. B The Gentleman Rhymer


 * 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   keep. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Mr. B The Gentleman Rhymer

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I speedied this and then restored it in response to doubts raised on my talk page. It's unclear to me whether this meets our notability guideline for musicians, as I can't find more than passing mentions in reliable sources. Without that, weak delete. With evidence of significant coverage, I'll reverse my position.--Chaser (talk) 17:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Although the BBC article is just a passing mention, he is discussed in detail at The Argus.  Nevertheless, an artist with a debut album without much discussion generally isn't enough in my view to pass WP:MUSIC. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:26, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I just found this interview in Music Magazine. Switching to neutral.--Chaser (talk) 16:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 *  Weak Keep  Thanks Chaser for giving this one a chance! There's mentions here in the Sunday Times and also the Telegraph. Also an interview from a festival he played. I still think he could possibly come under section 7 of WP:MUSIC, or being a musical comic, section 2 and/or 3 of WP:ENTERTAINER, but this is my first experiance interacting with wikipedia so I'm not 100% on all the rules here. All the best. -- Piperazine (talk) 19:34, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 *  Delete as it stands  "Also playing was Mr B the self-styled gentleman rhymer who combines "beats, rhymes and manners" into a charming whole he has dubbed "chap hop" rather than hip hop." That is the 'featuring' in the BBC article. I feel that he might be trying to introduce the Queen's English to hip-hop, not the way stated. Good luck to him - I hop he succeeds. (yes, that was deliberate) Given better referencing, I would be prepared to change my mind - as always. Peridon (talk) 20:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Switching to  Neutral  till I feel up to investigating new refs. It is nice to find someone who will listen when referencing is in question. So many just repeat guff... (Probably means they can't find any. Coverage is appearing here.) Peridon (talk) 20:30, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Switching again to Keep. Looks OK now. Peridon (talk) 15:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Point taken Peridon, that BBC article is a little lame to say the least. I will be trying to improve the article over the next week or so, but this is my first ever go at editing a wiki page, and I'm struggling with the wiki markup language a little (especially referencing), so I hope you can all bear with me. -- Piperazine (talk) 21:41, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I've managed to make a few edits after I figured out how to reference (many thanks Peridon). I've got to read up on adding photo's now.. eek, but as it stands I would like to switch to Keep -- Piperazine (talk) 18:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I've struck through your weak keep above to keep things straight. Peridon (talk) 21:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Another news article has popped up this morning at This is Local London. -- Piperazine (talk) 06:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:28, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I know it has absolutely no standing in terms of the rules, but I'm really glad I found this wikipedia article to explain about one of the acts who played at the Frank Sidebottom commemoration event in Manchester. So I was really glad it was here.

14:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpmaytum (talk • contribs)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  01:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * keep Sufficient references. Artw (talk) 03:20, 11 July 2010 (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.