Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Semzi


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. A rough consensus finally materialized after the last relist (thank you, !). Owen&times; &#9742;  13:53, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Semzi

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

Fails WP:GNG or WP:NPRODUCER. Sources are either passing mentions, interviews, PRs, or not even mentioning the subject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians,  and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: I'm almost certain the award nominations are notable, but we still need better sourcing for more biographical information. Oaktree b (talk) 15:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * More research would be done to support article with more sourcing for biographical information. The subject is quite a notable individual with just probably limited press publications ReoMartins (talk) 18:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @ReoMartins Well, now you’re taking. As far as I know, there are a lot of notable people in real life who can’t a Wikipedia entry because they don’t meet the necessary Wikipedia notability criteria. Wikipedia’s notability is not exactly real world notability. The current status of this article doesn’t meet up, not that they’re not notable or influential in real life. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. The subject does not meet any criteria outlined in WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. None of the sources cited in the article actually discuss the subject. His nominations at the Beatz Awards aren't enough to justify a stand-alone article.  Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 15:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: I agree with Oaktree B that this is a weak keep due to the award nominations. His other sources are weak.Maxcreator (talk) 03:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify: and mark as promised. Majority of the sources in the article doesn't meet SIGCOV and while the awards merits notability: it's still not much for a standalone entry on Wikipedia. I will remove some sources that didn't add to notability. For my vote (if draftified) can be marked as "promising", since there is a partial way to notability in the future! Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 20:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: After analysis of the source above, I was convinced of the many "passing mentions", "no mention" and more generated in citing sources relating to PR. Nothing to draftify again. It doesn't meet WP:THREE for sources, WP:GNG and WP:PRODUCER. Each of the sources either mention, or not at all, or about a music one of an artist he had worked for previously. Delete is the "best" alternative. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 13:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 * In one of the discussions and sources, it submits an evidence about this act who just recently co-produced a track that has over ten credible and notable artistes from Sub-Sahara Africa featured. These artistes have their wiki pages, I believe the professional who takes up the task to fuse these different acts into a single musical project is worthy of an article on Wikipedia as well. ReoMartins (talk) 13:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @ReoMartins It is imperative for you to know that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason for you to think an article should be kept. You should also importantly see WP:INHERITED. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Liz, there is already a consensus here if by analysis of the arguments above. Isn't see the reason for relisting. Most importantly, the keep isn't strong enough or showed how the article meets inclusion. The source table can also be reviewed to see blatant addition of sources that doesn't mention the article.  (Just a 'simpler' suggestion. )  — Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 09:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SafariScribe Hehe, if I was an administrator, I would have relisted this discussion too, so don't worry, Liz made the right decision. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:06, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Vanderwaalforces, Sure. It's just that Liz doesn't take time analysing such deletions. Welp, it's good getting clearer consensus. — Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 14:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Safari Scribe, well, that's quite an insult I didn't expect to see when I was reviewing open AFD discussions tonight. I'll just leave this one for another closer to handle since you are unsatisfied with how I'm handling things. Again, this is a volunteer hobby, not a job and nothing obligates me to close or relist any AFD discussion but I try to use my best judgment. But I'll leave this one alone and someone else can eventually close it. Liz Read! Talk! 06:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: Working with subjects that pass GNG is not enough to provide notability. While I see subject having some nominations, I fail to see WP:GNG or WP:NPRODUCER here by secondary sources.Tumbuka Arch (talk) 13:39, 24 April 2024 (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.