Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vybe References

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. T. Canens ( talk) 18:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Vybe

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Despite an extensive search I could not find enough significant reliable coverage for this music producer. Most of what I could find were forum posts or passing mentions in unreliable sources. As an aside, the lone online article I could find about him is not exactly a positive one. Narutolovehinata5 ^t
c
csd
new 11:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 ^t
c
csd
new 11:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 ^t
c
csd
new 11:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Delete - Lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources. I can find mentions in unreliable sources and that's really pretty much it for coverage. -- Whpq ( talk) 16:31, 12 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Keep -The article has been fully updated including realibe sources dating back to 2010, mentioned by MTV news,as well as mentioned in [1] Bilboard.com Realisreal25 ( talk) 06:32, 18 January 2017 (UTC) reply
- Comment - Mentions do not represent significant coverage. As for the added sources, Wikipedia, and Twitter are not reliable sources. And a couple of interviews do not establish notability, nor is it at all clear that the web sites can be considered reliable sources. The SNTmag interview has no byline, and the lead paragraph is cribbed directly from this same Vybe article without attribution. Crazypellas also seems to be a site designed for artists and DJs promotion. -- Whpq ( talk) 14:06, 18 January 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete There's a couple of interviews on websites that are barely above the level of a blog; certainly no coverage in anything that could be considered a reliable source. The mentions that are discussed in the "keep" vote (by the article's creator) are just that - quick mentions. Non-notable artist. Not even close. Rockypedia ( talk) 02:55, 19 January 2017 (UTC) reply
- Comment - The article in question is linked to significant articles / pages that already exist, the musician clearly has done work either with or for other musicians including producing a song for a major label interscope records artist (At the time) whom may seem significant enough to have an wiki page aswell, and there are far worst pages on wiki that i can link that have 0 sources at all either they're from their on website's bio or else where, that are still up on Wikipedia with no question on its notability. Realisreal25 ( talk) 03:19, 19 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Comment The fact that there are plenty of articles about bands on wikipedia that have less sources is not a justification for keeping this one. The goal is to remove them all---an improbable task, for sure--but there are only so many editors and hours in a day. When you come across an article you feel is not worthy of notability feel free to nominate it. That's why AfD exists. ShelbyMarion ( talk) 06:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC) reply
Comment to Realisreal25 ( talk), see WP:INHERITORG on why notability is not inherited. If an artist worked with another artist that is notable, that does not automatically make them notable. To your second point, could you provide some examples of "far worst(sic) pages on wiki that i can link that have 0 sources at all"? I'd like to begin the process of deleting those as well. Thanks. Rockypedia ( talk) 15:38, 19 January 2017 (UTC) reply

Delete Fails per references criteria. The only decent reference is Billboard, but the linked article wants to make the flawed argument that the subject—who is not even mentioned—is notable by association. Crazy Phellas and SNT Magazines are sites that solicit user submitted articles from artist wishing to promote themselves. The rest are social media. ShelbyMarion ( talk) 06:49, 19 January 2017 (UTC) reply

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.