Talk:Taj Jackson

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Taj Jackson II.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:23, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The owner of photo is going to release permissions soon. TruthGuardians (talk) 23:29, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What's your connection with the owner of the photos, please? Storchy (talk) 23:29, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (This person is a member of the Jackson Family. They are notable for their occupations listed on the page and have verified accounts across all of social media like Twitter and Instagram This article is well sourced with independent reliable sources and lesser notable pages and people exists on Wikipedia. The page is not promoting or selling any products or services. There is no puffery here or peacock and weasel words.) --TruthGuardians (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What's your connection with the owner of the photos, please? Storchy (talk) 23:46, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I follow them on social media. No business relations nor are we related. TruthGuardians (talk) 23:49, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not promotional or violate any Wikipedia rules. Its clear in the content of the page that nothing is being promoted. Tag needs removalMraClean (talk) 00:11, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No? How about "The foundation thrives to provide an outlet for those who have suffered a loss in life. Their mission is to make their mother proud by continuing her legacy of love and charity. To connect those who have a commonality in grief and provide a safe space to share stories, advice, and build a community in which no one feels alone. Through their music therapy program, they hope to give back to those who have suffered great loss and make a positive impact through community and music therapy", for starters. The whole article needs to be blown up and re-written. Storchy (talk) 07:17, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

that’s a simple fix. I would agree with that one section, that I did not create and sped read through getting fixed now. The entire article does not need blowing up. I approve and reject drafts on Wikipedia frequently. This one example is a fixable issue. Blowing up the article is far too extreme. I see where you have decided to assist. Thank you for the work done those far. TruthGuardians (talk) 13:56, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]