Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/East Park Productions

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. While there are multiple nominated pages and concerns of a TRAINWRECK, there are no arguments for keeping them presented, and several valid for !deletion, ergo individual nominations are not needed. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:26, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

East Park Productions[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MC Shadow, there was a growing consensus that the articles above also had WP:NMUSIC and WP:V issues, re-using many of the same dubious sources and much of the same WP:OR as the master article.

There was some consensus that Get Loose Crew was marginally more notable than the others, but I'm unable to find any evidence of that myself. If there is some reference out there that could establish notability, I'd propose keeping that article, redirecting the album article to it, and deleting the rest. —{Canuck lehead} 00:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. DOOMSDAYER520 | TALK | CONTRIBS 20:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. DOOMSDAYER520 | TALK | CONTRIBS 20:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I see this as an unreferenced — since removal of the only, and blatantly erroneous and unreliable, source — piece of promotional puffery for a not-notable 'record label'. With no doubt unintended irony, the article states: "To date, East Park Productions has released under its name one mini LP, with five singles". Not exactly in the big league then, or any league at all. The nominator mentions Get Loose Crew; I think that one suffers the same promotional badly sourced verbiage and is also a prime candidate for AFD, so redirecting there would be adding further garbage to a spoil heap. Acabashi (talk) 11:00, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Comment - This AfD has the record company in its header, but note that it has been combined with AfDs for a group that was signed to that company, their album, and a song by one of the band's members. I think this multi-subject AfD covering several different entities and product categories runs afoul of WP:TRAINWRECK. As things stand now, any vote in this AfD must address all of the nominated articles. DOOMSDAYER520 | TALK | CONTRIBS 20:52, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Does this mean it would be preferable to here detach each of the three articles included to their own AFD page running in parallel ? Acabashi (talk) 09:57, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I would recommend. Your vote above is about the record company, and the vote by Richard3120 below is about the MC Shadow song. DOOMSDAYER520 | TALK | CONTRIBS 17:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry about that – I simply followed the link from the song article, and assumed the deletion discussion would be solely about that, without looking at the title of this discussion. This is exactly what Doomsdayer520 is talking about: unless the opinions are "delete all" or "keep all", this could turn messy. Richard3120 (talk) 18:04, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Resurrection (MC Shadow song), at least: fails WP:NSONG. One review from a university student magazine, and a placing on a student radio chart, neither of which demonstrate notability, and two links to articles about the artist who drew the cover, neither of which mention the song at all. Nothing to indicate that this song is notable, and now the artist's article has been deleted, nowhere to redirect to either. Richard3120 (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per Acabashi, there's insufficient sourcing for any of these articles and no firm proof of notability. Jediting1 (talk) 18:10, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All. I don't think this nomination is a train wreck, all these articles are about a related subject (Mc Shadow) all were created by the same editor and all suffer the exact same problem - there is no evidence any of them are notable. Considering each article in turn:

East Park Productions - Currently unsourced, only previous source is a student magazine. Google turns up Wikipedia mirrors and social media. No news or newspaper hits. No coverage in Google books.
Get Loose Crew - currently sourced to 3 private documents, a talk show appearance, an interview quote, a music pool and a top 10 list on a blog. Google turned up Wikipedia mirrors and social media. No news or newspaper hits. No results from Google books. Some editors have suggested that the group may have some notability, In which case I would suggest that a WP:TNT deletion would be a good starting point given the current article is about 80% unsourced content about Living People and about 20% poorly sourced content that would need to be rewritten.
Get Loose Crew (album) - Currently unsourced. Previous sources were a private document and the same top 10 list used in Get Loose Crew. Google turns up Wikipedia mirrors and social media. No news or newspaper hits, and seemingly no reviews. No coverage in Google books.
Resurrection (MC Shadow song) - Sources consist of 2 press releases, an interview with Mc shadow, some coverage of the cover artist that does not mention the song and a non-notable chart. Allready deleted once as non-notable here, but recreated by same author. Google turns up social media, some lyric spam websites and Wikipedia mirrors. There seems to be no news or newspaper results. No reviews, did not appear in any notable charts. Although not really a notability guideline the song has ~2000 views on YouTube, which does not bode well as a sign of notability for a song released in 2015.

192.76.8.81 (talk) 13:19, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. I agree that there isn't a trainwreck problem here, as all of the topics are directly related to each other and were all started by the same user around the same time. But none of them have any credible or reliably sourced claim to passing WP:NMUSIC — since Resurrection is a recreation of an article that was previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lost (MC Shadow song), I'm going to repeat the points I made the first time, that (a) earshot is not an IFPI-certified chart that would count toward passage of NMUSIC's charting criterion, and (b) the source doesn't even properly verify the claim in the first place, because it's one college radio station's tracking report and not the final fully compiled chart. And no, "CHEER Music Pool" is not a notability-making chart either, as I've also previously pointed out at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wannabe (Get Loose Crew song). And of these four articles, two are completely unsourced while the other two are sourced exclusively to junk — and none of them are making any notability claim strong enough to exempt them from having to be sourced much, much better than they are. As always, Wikipedia is not a platform for people to promote themselves as a bypass around their failure to have gotten media coverage in the past. Bearcat (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2020 (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.