Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ill Mitch (2nd 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 delete. In addition, one of the keep arguments provides a stronger argument for deletion than for keeping. --Core desat 05:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ill Mitch (2nd nomination)

Article was previously deleted and recreated. The speedily deletion of the recreation was overturned at deletion review due to a mention in Stuff magazine. So the article is now restored and back here to discuss if notability is sufficiently established. This is a procedural nomination, I have no opinion. ~ trialsanderrors 22:08, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Fails WP:MUSIC. The subject has not "been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable." The mention in Stuff magazine is only a couple of dozen words, buried in the middle pages.
Subject cannot be found on Amazon.com, which is a pretty good indication that he fails criteria about sales. All of the many Ghits are trivial sites: social networking (mySpace, and similar) and directories (including user-posted sites like lyric sites and Last FM).
There are no reviews by non-trivial independent publications.
Have you noticed the 'update' posted to the blog entry, the URL of which was proved by the editor: [1] Specifically: "should be obvious that this is a hoax. But if it's not, well, now it is." The mention in Stuff also hints at this.
The creator of this version of the article seems to have a WP:COI, indicated by 1) desperation to keep this on Wikipedia, 2) this article is the full concern of his contributions here since 15 November 2006 (after a 10 month absence), and 3) communication with the subject is proven through his very abrupt assertions that he has permission to post the images.
All of the concerns expressed in the first AFD are still very valid. At the end of the day, this is about a non-notable rapper (per WP:MUSIC) using Wikipedia for self promotion. There is very little on even his own website to indicate notability. All we have to go on is an incredibly brief mention in a lads mag. According to the cited blog entry, provided by Jellonuts, it is also a hoax. The JPS ^{talk to me} 22:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article is a re-write of on the subject of the article that was deleted 6 months ago. The authors are different and the articles are not similar. I was not the original author, but I did most of the updating. I saw the block was lifted in review, so I went ahead and uploaded the latest version in case someone else wants to work with it and for review. I'll repost the notability sources here on the AfD and then I am done with it because I am sick of arguing over this silly article. As for COI issues, I worked hard and "wasted" a lot of time updating this page, so yes I was fightig to keep it and maybe I have been a little obsessive. This was indeed my first major contribution, though I have made some other minor edits to other articles under my ip address because I forget to sign in sometimes. I do make small edits when I see mistakes on other articles, and after this contribution I did plan to continue to contribute to other articles. Like I said, I am discouraged and done because I am sick of my integrity being questioned. Yes, I am an Ill Mitch fan, no I am not Ill Mitch. Do what you will, here is the info I had:

Notability as an independent artist and an internet phenomenon:

Notable mentions:

Stuff Magazine article, April 2003 Page 38. Stuff magazine is a mainstream entertainment magazine. There is a scan of the article avaliable since Stuff Magazine does not have free archives of old editions avaliable on their web site.
Bacon Magazine article accessed at http://www.frymybacon.com/articles/articles.php?articleID=422
Colorado Daily newspaper article from Thursday, June 12, 2003 edition.
The artist's web site's high traffic http://www.illmitch.com/ that has 1978615 hits as of today and, also high Google hits and My Space hits.
The artist is mentioned by name in a song by independant artist U-Kru which was linked to on the original article.

No, you won't find his CD's on Amazon etc. How many independent artists music are avaliable there though?

That's what I have, and I believe that the newspaper and two magazine articles are enough to warrant having an article. It would detract from wikipedia as an information source to delete it because this silly rapper really is an internet phenomenon to a lot of people. I first started editing the page because I did a wiki search for Ill Mitch and saw it was a recreated page that needed updating. I made mistakes because I had not done much of this before, and I think it is now up to wiki standards. It's not reliable to mention this, but I do want to say anecdotally that several people at my college have purchased his CD's and know about him. He is silly and weird, maybe even fake, but nevertheless he is notable. Jellonuts 23:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and SALT per my comments on deletion review, which are in accordance with the statements made above by The JPS. MSJapan 00:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete but don't salt, as the band could conceivably become notable enough in the future. The sources provided don't seem good enough. Also, if a band has nothing on Amazon.com that is a pretty good sign of non-notability. Jellonuts asked "how many independent artists music are available there (Amazon.com)?" Actually, a lot. Indeed, many indie bands that are not notable enough for Wikipedia have cds for sale on Amazon.com and Amazon is widely utilized by people who are really into indie music for this reason. --The Way 01:23, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. EliasAlucard|Talk 02:37, 21 Jan, 2007 (UTC)
Delete, there have been no proofs of notability despite multiple requests. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete When the argument for keep is based on the premise that we should ignore WP:RS for this article, there's a problem. GassyGuy 04:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep is obviously a hoax; he isn't an actual, serious artist, but is rather a "character" fabricated for laughs. Being Russian myself, I was able to easily discern that he isn't actually Russian; on the cover of one of his albums, "ILL Mitch" was not transliterated properly into Russian Cyrillic, but was "transliterated" by using the phonetic Cyrillic keyboard layout. Also, in his songs, he states some ridiculous aspects of and facts about life in Russia that are blatantly untrue. I believe that this article ought to not be deleted because if other articles that cover various "internet phenomena" are seldom prone to deletion due to what they are about, then there is no reason to just delete this article due to ILL Mitch's authenticity as an actual independent artist being questionable. The article needs to be simply straightened out so that it would truthfully reflect the internet phenomenon that is ILL Mitch; it shouldn't be in such a format that depicts him as an actual artist.

Xolman 22:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC) Xolman[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.