Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jazzfeezy (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. SoWhy 09:13, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jazzfeezy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It continues to fail at a major point of WP:Reference and WP:MUSICBIO. DBrown SPS (talk) 10:06, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:05, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:05, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. 68.189.200.18 (talk) 21:45, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The new sources that have been added are not bolstering the case for notability per WP:NMUSIC at all, as virtually none of them count as reliable sources — out of 20 footnotes here, literally the only two that aren't automatic non-starters are the two Billboard cites, and those both just verify the existence of a song named in the article body while completely failing to verify the subject's claimed involvement with it. Which means that exactly zero of the sources here properly support Jazzfeezy's notability at all. Bearcat (talk) 21:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SoWhy 09:06, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SoWhy 09:30, 19 July 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.