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.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:58, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Wings (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)

Promo UPE article. Refs are paid for PR, non-bylined content and promo articles. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 20:22, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Missouri. Shellwood (talk) 20:33, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:06, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• There is a little coverage in The Source[1] and quite a bit about his involvement in a failed Burna Boy concert in South Africa, although the latter could be viewed as WP:1E, plus the LA Weekly coverage. It seems marginal, and the article needs a lot of work. But one or two more sources could save it. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree, there is decent coverage and this can be improved not deleted. Gwatakwata (talk) 09:25, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gwatakwata:@Colapeninsula: Can you give me two other sources that prove he is notable. The LA Weekly coverage is a good WP:SECONDARY but it is single reference and is likely only seen a WP:OR. WP:BLP which states "Wikipedia must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources" means must have good sources. Another two and I close this. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 10:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment/question It looks to me like the TimesLive and Sunday World articles are substantial. From what I can learn on the sites themselves, both seem to have suitable stature in their markets. User:scope_creep, do you have information that would lead us to conclude that these are not reliable sources? Thanks. Lamona (talk) 05:34, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The TimesLive one looks like an interview containing several quotes by him, copied verbatim, which make the majority of the article along with an image supplied by him. The Sundayworld is another similar type of thing. They have used an image of him from instagram. It may better but I don't know, hence this Afd. They dont seem particularly independent. scope_creep^Talk 09:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this blatantly promotional text, full of advertorials, such as this, this, or this, pretending to be sources. -The Gnome (talk) 11:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Forensics since a simple incision seems not to be enough. We have & found:

Simple, typical, unexceptional announcements of a new hip hop release in a hip hop website, such as this in The Source, e.g. "new single and album are available on all digital streaming platforms. Check out latest single below," etc; the LA Weekly reproducing here a press release put together by our subject's PR; TshisAlive, the promotional branch of the South African Sunday Times putting out advertorials about every little thing concerning their artist, e.g. here about a beef with Ticketpro, here about philanthropy plans, etc; a lot of items about the one truly notable event in our subject's career, i.e. the "Burna Boy debacle," e.g. here, all doused by a strong sprinkle of promotion; assorted dead links; and that's it. Try as we graciously might, there is no there there. -The Gnome (talk) 13:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I agree that there's no there here. Do we need a WP:NEWSORGSA like we have for WP:NEWSORGINDIA? This coverage has a lot of that same flavour. -- asilvering (talk) 18:28, 18 October 2024 (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.