Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject G-Unit Records

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was  Redirect to WikiProject Hip hop. --RL0919 (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject G-Unit Records


Project started back in 2007 and went inactive since 2008. No activity or relivent discussions since. JJ98 (Talk)  01:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Hip hop or delete. Another example of a failed 'go it alone' approach by short-term fans. -- Klein zach  02:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete-- doesn't seem to be anything worth saving here. -- E♴  (talk)  04:18, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep . With 396 incoming links, there must something non-trivial here.  Was active.  A decent talk page.  Has a decent scope.  Can be revived or assimilated.  It may be a long wait until a group picks this up and runs, but it is causing no harm in the meantime.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:00, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The links are just project banners! Half the talk page are circulars. Project discussions began in 2007 and petered out in 2008. I see nothing that contributors to G-Unit Records articles would find useful. There are no archives. As the G-Unit Records article makes clear, few recordings have ever been published so the scope is narrow. Only 20 members. Realistically there is no expectation of this being revived — the long hiatus proves this. -- Klein zach  04:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, the links include a lot of banners of this inactive wikiproject. There are other incoming links I'll look at later, but I think the onus should be on the nominator to explain things like a large number of incoming links.
 * I am tending to an argument that G-Unit Records, as a commercial company and not a subject per se, it not a suitable focus for a WikiProject. Could it be that we are looking at spam?  The non-trivial thing here is a record label being spammed?  Do you really think that G-Unit Records had "short-term fans".
 * I'm afraid that JJ98's nominations seem random to me, and that his nomination rationale is unconnected to good reasons for deletion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:56, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Many of JJ98's nominations have been of stale/non-viable/narrow-scope pop bands, TV shows and video games. His choice is not random. -- Klein  zach  01:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep and redirect to WikiProject Hip hop to preserve the project's history and the valuable discussion on the talk page:

I really think we should start the G-Unit feuds article again, the 50 Cent, G-Unit, Lloyd Banks, Young Buck, etc. articles just dont say everything about the beefs.--Yankees10 23:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * G-Unit feuds


 * I would really advise against it. It will be deleted again, per the previous deletion. Also, the 50 Cent article is at GA status, so maybe we should use that article as an example. The G-Unit article has major problems with the feud section, because that is pretty much the whole article. At least 50% of the article is feuds. That needs to be reduced. Also, that previous AfD deleted several other "feud" pages. Including the page for hip hop rivalries. You can help us some more by removing unecessary feud information from the G-Unit article, wikifying references (The-G-Unit-Boss and I have recently started to wikify references in some of the articles), making sure everything is cited, etc., but this would only be deleted again. --- Realest4Life 01:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I also think that the G-Unit Feuds aricle should be re-created. I have still been working on it in the hope that if I recreate it it will be good enough to be kept. I think that if we really cut down on the 'He said, She said' etc etc and removed ALL unsourced statements that it would have a pretty good chance of being kept. --The-G-Unit-Boss 11:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You guys don't understand, do you? No matter how good the article will be, sourced, neutral, everything, the main reason it was deleted was because a feud article simply does not belong here. It was deleted. It will most likely be deleted again. Also, you two were the main editors at the g-unit feuds article, so let's see if anyone else (with no G-Unit bias whatsoever) thinks it is a good idea. Not a hip-hop fan, preferrably an administrator, ask him or her, is it allowed? --- Realest4Life 12:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I do understand that, it just that im saying if the article was of an exceptional standard, then it would most likely be kept. I'm thinking of re-creating it anytime soon anyway --The-G-Unit-Boss 12:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Before you do, ask an administrator if it is a good idea. --- Realest4Life 12:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I will be sure to do that --The-G-Unit-Boss 12:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The biggest priority in this project should be the articles on G-Unit, Lloyd Banks, Tony Yayo, and Young Buck. When editing the feuds, we only need to list the most notable ones. Why do we need a rogue gallery of every feud they've ever had? The featured Slayer band has a "Feuds" section, but it's condensed. If you do want to re-create the article, you may seek a deletion review. If it turns out successful, make sure there's no unsourced statements (and that means no fact tags littered throughout the page). Spellcast 13:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If i was to re-create it I would ensure that there were NO unsourced statements etc. --The-G-Unit-Boss 13:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I think you are having some problems understanding what "encyclopedic" means. It does not mean that it is not formatted correctly, uncited, or something like that, it means that the subject of the article (feuds) is simply not appropriate for an encyclopedia. It could be written so well that it is GA or FA, or it could be a stub, but feuds are not appropriate here. That's why another 5 or so articles were deleted after the G-Unit feuds AfD. They simply do not belong here. --- Realest4Life 14:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I know that. Im saying if I was to create it again. --The-G-Unit-Boss 17:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The historical discussion about G-Unit feuds and Articles for deletion/G-Unit feuds should be preserved in the event that future members of the project want to recreate the article. The discussion may sway them to create or refrain from creating such an article. Cunard (talk) 22:40, 7 June 2011 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.