Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V-Nasty (3rd nomination)


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

V-Nasty
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Person is not at all notable, and fails WP:MUSICBIO, this page was deleted before, all the sources don't seem to be reliable, except maybe the Boston Globe and the article wasn't even really about the person in question. LiberatorLX (talk) 14:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:29, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:29, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep The fact that the article is a stub, does not mean it is not notable. The artist has been a subject of many publication (even a simple Google search brings many results), they just haven't been included. Also she is signed to a major label and has a major label album released, which was also subject to comments from the media. 2Flows (talk) 14:36, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Just check the comments from the previous discussion, where lots of notable sources have been presented and resulted in a keep... 2Flows (talk) 14:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment How many have been sold? Anyone can release an album, it doesn't make them notable or famous, I don't really believe this person in question meets the criteria for a Musician, let alone is notable enough for an article on wikipedia. This person in question seems to be a glorified groupie, but not a musician. What parts of WP:MUSICBIO does she pass? 5. says: Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable). One is not good enough. LiberatorLX (talk) 14:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If deletion is not an option, maybe a redirect to Kreayshawn would be a good idea, but the article itself doesn't appear to be inherently notable for an individual article. LiberatorLX (talk) 14:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * She passes musicbio 1, easily. Your personal feelings about the subject are not relevant, and insulting language about the subject of a BLP is never acceptable. 78.19.52.125 (talk) 15:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to insult, I'm just saying she seems to be more groupie than an actual musician, and doesn't seem to pass WP:MUSICBIO, could you explain how she passes 1.? LiberatorLX (talk) 15:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The article clearly passes point 1, as it has received wide media coverage. If you had read the discussion for the previous nomination, you would see plenty of links to notable sources who have articles about her, since then even more have come up and a simple Google search can confirm that, as I mentioned above. 2Flows (talk) 16:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Well before nominating this article, I actually did check for that, alot of the sources were from blog posts, and Wikipedia states that if they are a journalist then yes it could be reliable, however blog posts can be written by basically anyone, and there is no indication that those who wrote the blog posts were in fact journalists, this does make it very complex, but if you feel deletion isn't a bad idea, perhaps Userfying or Redirection to a notable page is a good option. I'm not saying the person in question could be notable one day, and I have nothing against the person in question, I am unbiased, I nominated this article in good faith because as it stands right now, her notability is questionable. So it's not really clear if it passes 1. or not. LiberatorLX (talk) 17:33, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blogs_as_sources

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_source_examples#Are_web_forums_and_blog_talkbacks_reliable_sources.3F LiberatorLX (talk) 17:27, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I do not mean blogs, but notable publications as I said. I compiled a list of some for you:


 * New York Times -
 * Complex -, ,
 * XXL -, , ,
 * LA Weekly - ,
 * Vibe - ,
 * Spin - ,
 * Exclaim! -
 * BET -, , ,
 * HipHopDX - ,


 * and also reviews for her album include:


 * The A.V. Club -
 * Allmusic -
 * Boston Globe -
 * Consequence of Sound -
 * Pitchfork -
 * Spin -
 * XXL -
 * 2Flows (talk) 20:08, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, per the above list, changing my vote to Speedy Keep, notability is obvious... 2Flows (talk) 20:20, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Some of those might be reliable sources, others are not, can you add some of them to the article in question? I'd do it but I'm not the expert in this subject, so I don't know where to put it. I just didn't find it to pass WP:MUSICBIO when I looked at the article initially. If some reliable sources can be added to the article then there won't be any questions. Just from reading a few they seem to be blog posts once again, and for that to meet the requirements to be a reliable source it has to meet strict criteria, rarely can it be used as a source. LiberatorLX (talk) 14:17, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep She's clearly got enough media coverage to be notable. Second AfD had loads of sources cited, so I don't see why this was nominated again: it does look like a case of Did Not Do The Homework. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:39, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Well with all due respect, I did do the homework, I looked at the article, and did not find but one source that may have been reliable, a lot of the sources in the 2nd AfD didn't seem to be reliable, they were blog posts which need to meet strict criteria to be reliable. The sources should be in the article itself, not the 2nd AfD, or this one, and they must be reliable, which is still in question. If you want to help add some of the sources you believe are reliable be my guest, like I said before, I would try to do it myself but I figure you may know more about the subject in question. I'm looking at this from a neutral POV. LiberatorLX (talk) 14:17, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Comment Yes this article had been improved drastically, and I'm thinking of withdrawing the AfD. LiberatorLX (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per my rationale in the previous AfD: sufficient coverage exists in multiple reliable sources. Subject meets WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO.  Gong   show  05:51, 12 August 2013 (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.