Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Essence

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. The consensus below is that there are no independent, reliable sources to demonstrate notability. Eluchil404 (talk) 06:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Essence[edit]

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

Delete. Notability not established in accordance with topical notability guidelines for musicians or in accordance with the general notability guidelines. Only recording is a released single on iTunes today, produced by his sister. Sourcing includes his release on iTunes, a blog, and a link to a list of songs Billboard about smokin' weed. The Billboard site does not mention the subject or his iTune song. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 02:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no doubt that musicians who record pot smoking songs can be notable. However, this article seems to be a promotional effort for a guy who released a pot smoking sing today. The essence of the matter is that this particular pot smoking musician is not yet notable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is a clear case of WP:TOOSOON. The singer has yet to become notable and the phrasing on the article is pretty promotional in tone. Releasing a song does not give you automatic notability, nor does creating a song about using any type of illicit drugs. Article does not pass WP:ARTIST. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I deleted the article under A7 and immediately re-deleted because I had failed to observe the creator's note at talk saying that he'd be expanding it. No opinion on keeping or deleting, but if you vote here, I'd like to remind you to check back periodically to see if anything has been improved. Nyttend (talk) 21:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Looked at article, still non-notable. I can't find anything myself. SL93 (talk) 18:30, 3 December 2011 (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.