- 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. ( non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis ( talk) 02:52, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Doe B
- Doe B ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While he was alive, the page automatically redirected to Grand Hustle Records, indicating that he did not match Wikipedia's criteria for notability while alive (none of his singles charted on Billboard, nor was there any release date in sight for his album). Only after his death did he get an article of his own; per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stack Bundles, another rapper whose article was created after his death, death does not make you notable. Much respect to the man and condolences to his family, friends and fans, but Doe B's career was non-notable; death doesn't change that. Tom Danson ( talk) 16:54, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. Tom Danson ( talk) 16:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Tom Danson ( talk) 16:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep — I created the redirect quite a while ago, too lazy to get around to create the article yet. However, even prior to his death (which received an insane amount of media coverage Billboard, CNN, Entertainment Weekly, NY Daily News, BET and just as you nominated this NBC and USA Today), he had already recieved enough coverage in reliable sources to warrent his own article and pass WP:GNG. Coverage during his life including Complex, XXL, Signed to Interscope, Complex, Vibe, Vice, and XXL and thats just the small amount I had saved up to write the article, indepth looking through a google search will find much coverage in reliable sources unrelated to his death. The comparison to Stack Bundles is very off, Doe B was signed to a major record label and T.I.'s Grand Hustle Records. Either way the coverage was there before he died, his death just added a bunch on top of it. STATic message me! 17:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep — This is a notable artist beyond the immediate tragic news. User talk:STATicVapor indicates a great number of references that will reinforce the artistic notability. In any case, I am clearly not an advocate of speedy actions in such cases. For me utility and usefulness has precedence for now. 12,387 people visited the page three days ago, 12,512 two days ago and 12,210 just yesterday. There may be well over a 100,000 who will check this very page in just a few days to check primarily about his career. About the circumstances of death, they are flooded and have "embarass de choix". Pragmatism rules for now. What colleague User:Tom Danson is proposing is that we turn away tens of thousands of readers, or at best forward them to the 2-liner we have on Grand Hustle Records where Doe B is tucked in way in the bottom with no mention of his career... Is this the right time to propose deleting an article? I can understand it if this move was proposed say in a month or better two months down the road, and proposal discussed in calmer circumstances. But what do we achieve by putting forth some "technicality" and delete it right now? I offered the alternative that readers that habitually use Wikipedia in such moments and rely on it (rather than some newspaper or news agency item that will be only about the shooting incident). Our article, unlike most articles in other current media, is giving importance to presenting a balanced article that gives quite extensive coverage on Doe B's music career, the very thought in my mind when I researched and created the article. So this page has that "extra" offer others are not usually providing. That's the reason many basically come to Wikipedia in such times for their info. Furthermore the record company has clearly said it has tens of recordings by this artist and they will release them very soon, probably by next week or two. And my hunch is that it will chart significantly in the States creating more notability posthumously. Yes, I know this is speculative, but is an educated guess... All I'm saying, give the article a chance, for now. "Timing is of essence" here in this case. Flexibility and pragmatism rule rather than dogma and rigid regulations. In a month or two, the matter can be looked over with less consequence, and less controversy and adversity. Or else what we are saying in practical terms to all the interested people is that they should go and search elsewhere. werldwayd ( talk) 19:05, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. Appears to meet WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep, per werldwayd. Better references and detail is being added. And I have no interest in this sort of "music". Edwardx ( talk) 13:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep He was already notable before his death. Koala15 ( talk) 18:57, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. ( non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis ( talk) 02:52, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Doe B
- Doe B ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While he was alive, the page automatically redirected to Grand Hustle Records, indicating that he did not match Wikipedia's criteria for notability while alive (none of his singles charted on Billboard, nor was there any release date in sight for his album). Only after his death did he get an article of his own; per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stack Bundles, another rapper whose article was created after his death, death does not make you notable. Much respect to the man and condolences to his family, friends and fans, but Doe B's career was non-notable; death doesn't change that. Tom Danson ( talk) 16:54, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. Tom Danson ( talk) 16:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Tom Danson ( talk) 16:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep — I created the redirect quite a while ago, too lazy to get around to create the article yet. However, even prior to his death (which received an insane amount of media coverage Billboard, CNN, Entertainment Weekly, NY Daily News, BET and just as you nominated this NBC and USA Today), he had already recieved enough coverage in reliable sources to warrent his own article and pass WP:GNG. Coverage during his life including Complex, XXL, Signed to Interscope, Complex, Vibe, Vice, and XXL and thats just the small amount I had saved up to write the article, indepth looking through a google search will find much coverage in reliable sources unrelated to his death. The comparison to Stack Bundles is very off, Doe B was signed to a major record label and T.I.'s Grand Hustle Records. Either way the coverage was there before he died, his death just added a bunch on top of it. STATic message me! 17:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep — This is a notable artist beyond the immediate tragic news. User talk:STATicVapor indicates a great number of references that will reinforce the artistic notability. In any case, I am clearly not an advocate of speedy actions in such cases. For me utility and usefulness has precedence for now. 12,387 people visited the page three days ago, 12,512 two days ago and 12,210 just yesterday. There may be well over a 100,000 who will check this very page in just a few days to check primarily about his career. About the circumstances of death, they are flooded and have "embarass de choix". Pragmatism rules for now. What colleague User:Tom Danson is proposing is that we turn away tens of thousands of readers, or at best forward them to the 2-liner we have on Grand Hustle Records where Doe B is tucked in way in the bottom with no mention of his career... Is this the right time to propose deleting an article? I can understand it if this move was proposed say in a month or better two months down the road, and proposal discussed in calmer circumstances. But what do we achieve by putting forth some "technicality" and delete it right now? I offered the alternative that readers that habitually use Wikipedia in such moments and rely on it (rather than some newspaper or news agency item that will be only about the shooting incident). Our article, unlike most articles in other current media, is giving importance to presenting a balanced article that gives quite extensive coverage on Doe B's music career, the very thought in my mind when I researched and created the article. So this page has that "extra" offer others are not usually providing. That's the reason many basically come to Wikipedia in such times for their info. Furthermore the record company has clearly said it has tens of recordings by this artist and they will release them very soon, probably by next week or two. And my hunch is that it will chart significantly in the States creating more notability posthumously. Yes, I know this is speculative, but is an educated guess... All I'm saying, give the article a chance, for now. "Timing is of essence" here in this case. Flexibility and pragmatism rule rather than dogma and rigid regulations. In a month or two, the matter can be looked over with less consequence, and less controversy and adversity. Or else what we are saying in practical terms to all the interested people is that they should go and search elsewhere. werldwayd ( talk) 19:05, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. Appears to meet WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 05:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep, per werldwayd. Better references and detail is being added. And I have no interest in this sort of "music". Edwardx ( talk) 13:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep He was already notable before his death. Koala15 ( talk) 18:57, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- 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.