Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Substantial (rapper)


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:56, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Substantial (rapper)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has no reliable independent sources to substantiate the claims to notability, which are in any case weak. Guy (Help!) 10:14, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete absent actual reliable sources being found - he has no substantial impact on the international music scene from assiduous searching, but maybe there are strong Japanese sources? Collect (talk) 13:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Please review the account, the article has references sources from sites such as VH1, and MTV. Substantial is an important person as a performer and activist, and the numerous sources back that up. Enough information has been compiled from 3rd party media including magazine scans. I believe this page was nominated due to another user removing a large majorit of the information.Peace In Mississippi (talk) 01:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep easily passes the low wiki notability guide of wp:gng with the current external reports. Looks like revenge deletion here, where anon users here seem to hate any editing by real life people attempting to improve their bios and if they catch on to that the wiki users attack and if possible the anon wiki users delete the article altogether.Mosfetfaser (talk) 01:09, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * This AfD page is for discussing the article only, and not any theories about Wikipedia cabals. Cheers. Collect (talk) 01:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, as I said, Keep easily passes the low wiki notability guide of wp:gng with the current external reports. Mosfetfaser (talk) 01:39, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Might you name some of the reliable sources making him notable?   I assure you facebook, WP:SPS  and commercial sites selling records do not actually qualify for the purpose.  Cheers. Collect (talk) 01:50, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak-ish Keep. This guy is reasonably well known in underground hip-hop circles, so I'm surprised I couldn't find much in the way of really decent coverage, but I think he still meets WP:MUSICBIO through the independent coverage that I did find: . — sparklism hey! 14:21, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * And a couple more: . — sparklism hey! 14:24, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * And you feel "okayplayer.com" meets WP:RS? It looks like a blog from over here. Collect (talk) 14:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Good question. Okayplayer is a bit more than a blog; in the hip-hop world they're a pretty big deal. Here is their staff team page (at least one of whom has an article here). I did a quick G-search for "okayplayer reports" and turned up a couple of hits: Spin, Fact and (ahem) East Bay Express . So other (reputable, reliable) sites seem to consider them reliable. Granted, I'm not overwhelmed by that, but I think it's enough for them to be considered reliable here. — sparklism  hey! 19:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 13:57, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per the sources provided by User:Sparklism; there appears to be (just) enough coverage to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO.  Gong   show  01:07, 7 March 2014 (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.