Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shadow Di General


 * 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. Despite the inclusion of a source verifying the existence of Suriname (important), this rapper fails GNG. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Shadow Di General

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP article, which is a year old, with no refs, with little in way of coverage outside social media. Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BIO. scope_creep (talk) 22:39, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:48, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:48, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:48, 19 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Every rapper who exists is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article. This makes no claims that would satisfy WP:NMUSIC at all, and cites no evidence of reliable source coverage about him in media — the only "footnote" present in the article at all is the results of a general Google search which confirms the existence of Suriname (which nobody questioned, and is completely beside the point), and the only other links shown are his own self-published content on social networking platforms. At the time of creation, there was one other source present in the article — but it was a WordPress blog, not a reliable source, and the text it was actually supporting has been stripped as blatantly advertorial. Bearcat (talk) 21:45, 21 August 2017 (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.