Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Napoleon Maddox


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Napoleon Maddox

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Delete- not notable, no quality in depth references--Justhangin (talk) 00:09, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep - meets several of the notability guidelines: many releases, several international tours, one of the most prominent U.S. exponents of beatboxing, coverage in major media including The New York Times, etc. Badagnani (talk) 02:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Then where are the references other than his websites. The NYT article barely mentions him and doesn't say anything about him in particular. My dad was in the NYT once, and he even had a quote. He doesn't have a wikipedia page though.--Justhangin (talk) 05:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. Given the poor state of the article, it's hard to find any references in it that support Badagnani's claims.  Please simply list the specific sections of WP:MUSIC that have been met, by number at least, and the references for each. --Ronz (talk) 16:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It's best to familiarize oneself with the music notability guidelines before actually preparing a deletion report. This article is not a candidate for such. The artist has many CD releases, several international tours, he is one of the most prominent and active U.S. exponents of beatboxing, coverage in major media including The New York Times, etc. Badagnani (talk) 17:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Rather than telling other editors what to do, in violation of WP:BATTLE, please WP:PROVEIT.  I'm happy to help. --Ronz (talk) 18:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. For all intents and purposes, your opinion is not any more important than any other one, Badagnani. Rather than accusing editors of wrongdoings in their interpretations of policies and guidelines, you should focus on the content regardless of who created/edited it.  Eugene2x► talk 04:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 10:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability, no reviews or awards or coverage from reputable sources. NY Times article given as proof of notability mentions subject twice in an article about someone else. The amount of CD releases and tours does not matter, it's how notable those CDs and tours etc are that get the coverage that makes the subject notable. If anyone would like to provide some good quality references that attest to the subjects notability then the whole of Wikipedia will very gladly keep it in. If not, there can be no argument with a delete Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:25, 5 April 2009 (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.