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. with an acknowledgment that this article needs additional work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Dottley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable Creating deletion discussion for Jason Dottley The article seems merely a PR piece. e.g. "one of the 275 most influential people in LGBTI culture globally." But the citation leads to someone's blog. Ditto another claim whose citation leads to an article penned by a person who appears to be a PR agent. Recommend Delete MisterWizzy (talk) 13:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Tennessee. Shellwood (talk) 14:08, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Much as I hate to, because the article is indeed wildly promotional and horribly sourced and does need clean-up to meet anything like reasonable standards, his five Billboard chart places get him past WP:MUSICBIO. It was nice to see that the world was introduced to Jason Dottley... *waves back* Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:25, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Where are the citations for these Billboard chartings? I searched for them and cannot locate ANYTHING on them, let alone anything that would support the Top 20 claim. Most of the songs listed in this article have no citation from the pages of Billboard indicating chart positions, and many of the songs mentioned have a citation that points back to a YouTube video.

  Can Alexander McNabb's comment be considered an objective one if he is "waving" to the article's subject? The comment for this Keep vote doesn't suggest neutrality to me. This article still needs a deeper review. The lack of citations for many of these claims was what generated the notability tag. 2603:8001:2A00:7428:E954:7473:6B1D:2FF4 (talk) 16:10, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The article says 5 dance club songs in the Top 40 (not Top 20), supported by this. Schazjmd (talk) 16:22, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep additionally, the link referenced by Schazjmd here indeed mentions the charts, as he's had 5 top 40 on the Dance Club Charts, then if you press the toggle on the "Dance Club Chart" button, you see where he has 2 additional weeks on the Dance/Electronic Chart. As for the "waves back" comment, I assume that was sarcasm in reference to the article's wording as he quoted "It was nice to see that the world was introduced to Jason Dottley." It was not used in bias as to suggest he was actually waving to Jason. In addition to qualifying via WP:MUSICBIO criteria I would also like to add that there are WP:MANYLINKS ie from Sordid Lives, List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: D–E, Sordid Lives: The Series, List of comedy television series with LGBT characters, Benny Medina, Dottley and 36 others. A rewrite is advisable to adjust tone, but nothing mentioned isn't sited and the sources, with a few older exceptions, are very significant. 2806:102E:18:B693:1886:FAB0:8493:507F (talk) 19:05, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Billboard not only shows each of the 5 singles and their chart peak, but how many weeks they were charting. Jason has had 1 Top 20, 2 additional Top 25 and 2 additional Top 40. View here https://ibb.co/CbR1zKT 2806:102E:18:B693:887D:F761:33F3:A30C (talk) 05:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I'll be damned, a notable puff piece. Keep as per above, but please rewrite it. Oaktree b (talk) 19:20, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I admit to extreme conflict of interest in that I did, indeed, figuratively wave at the subject of the article. I condemn myself. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets the general notability guideline, in addition to MUSICBIO and probably WP:NACTOR (Sordid Lives theater productions, Sordid Lives: The Series). I added a feature piece in The Clarion-Ledger to the article (could use more mining). In combination with significant coverage in The Advocate, The Standard, and Deadline, there's clear evidence of a GNG/NBASIC pass. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:53, 12 June 2022‎ (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.