Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Da Prince


 * 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. Consensus was that the subject passes WP:GNG. (non-admin closure) Rollidan (talk) 21:04, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Paul Da Prince

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This doesnt pass the notability standards of Wikipedia and the sources are questionable. PK YellowWisdom (talk) 15:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. PK YellowWisdom (talk) 15:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak keep there's enough coverage (the gist of which is listed in the references section) for a weak keep. Some sources have covered him in depth, like this one. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep & COMMENT: Wow, what a thought!! I am the creator of this article. I must state that they has been an ongoing crusade by to nominate several African based articles for deletion. He last edited in July 2019 with minor edits in between and then returned today to nominate this one. In this instance, Paul is an evidently notable Namibian based singer and is subject to highly reliable independent sources. All the newspaper articles used, The Namibian, Namibian Sun & the Windheok Observer are top Namibian newspapers which have written about his work in great detail. They are all Reliable Independent sources with decades of reporting independent work. The subject clearly passes Wikipedia guidelines and is listed in notable and independent Namibian sources such as The Namibian & Namibian Sun. Its very unfortunate that we have Individuals within the sub-saharan Africa region whose main objective is but to discredit the achievements of others. Its a definite keep 10MB (talk) 16:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * A glance at the edit history of the Nominator shows he has made 56 edits with an ongoing crusade to nominate articles for deletion. Half of his edits are that of nominating African articles for deletion with more or less similar reasons, "questionable sources" 10MB (talk) 16:22, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * looks like a good faith editor to me. I see two AFD nominations and forty or so other edits, with some AFD votes thrown in. Anyway this is not relevant really-- what is relevant are the notability merits of the article. BTW, you can certainly !vote as article creator.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as he passes WP:GNG with significant coverage in reliable sources such as national newspapers already referenced in the article so there is no valid reason for deletion imv, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:31, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: per Atlantic306 Ceethekreator (talk) 21:29, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per Atlantic306, and close per WP:SNOW.4meter4 (talk) 16:26, 25 September 2019 (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.