Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statik G

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. Apparently TOOSOON now. Perhaps later... Joyous! | Talk 22:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Statik G (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)

Autobio or WP:COI article on up-and-coming young musician, seems to have made a great start to his music career, but WP:TOOSOON yet for an article. No significant coverage online from WP: Reliable sources, just music blog reviews and passing mentions of performances. News coverage seems to be all local indy press and local music blogs, with no indication of editorial policy. Doesn't yet meet WP:MUSICBIO, though it's pretty clear that he'll get there eventually. Wikishovel (talk) 20:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 20:28, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wyoming-related deletion discussions. Wikishovel (talk) 20:28, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• He deserves a chance to be seen and heard. I'm a huge fan, he's the number 1 rapper on reverb charts for hip hop and #8 in the globe I thought now would be the best time to let him shine and help someone notice him before he gives up. Give him a year he's touring with lil Wyte soon and working with major underground artists on his next album.. If you delete it now there's no point because he will fit the credentials by the time you do!! Or message me and let me know what sources are considered credible I will hit them up myself and do what I have to do to get him noticed!! He's too talented and everyone tried to keep him from being heard.. A wiki would show he is considered serious. Let me help — Preceding unsigned comment added by RhymeSickJunkie (talk • contribs) 16:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure he does deserve a chance to be seen and heard, but Wikipedia is for documenting things and people that are already notable, not to help them become notable. For examples of what kind of references Wikipedia article have about notable musicians, please see WP:MUSICBIO. If you need any help with the references, you're welcome to ask at my talk page. Thanks, Wikishovel (talk) 16:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This seems to be a bit WP:TOOSOON. At the moment there are not enough coverage in reliable sources to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. No objection to a recreation should more sources be found in the future. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:37, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the few independent sources seem very local. Hobit (talk) 04:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as trivial and unconvincing sources for the same trivial and unconvincing information along with a trivial and unconvincing career, they all say the same thing and therefore delete. SwisterTwister talk 08:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the delete comments mention that the sources are local and trivial, but they do meet the WP:MUSICBIO requirements of multiple, non-trivial (see denver.com), published works, and they don't meet any of the exceptions. Obviously this artist isn't a pop hit but based upon the coverage I'd say he meets notability requirements. Icebob99 (talk) 20:04, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I really only see the one [[WP::RS]], the Denver Post web article Icebob99 mentions. The "multiple" part seems to be lacking. Otherwise, I don't see that any of WP:BAND's criteria apply. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 07:39, 2 December 2016 (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.