Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King Tiger (rapper)

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. Courcelles (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

King Tiger (rapper)

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC: no clear secondary sources except WP:BLOGS, many are just top-level domains rather than specific pages. It's unclear what "Top 100 Number 1 Music Charts" is, whether the unsourced mention of a "Platinum Plaque" for a single is meant to be a serious claim to have "had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country" of WP:NMUSIC, and I can find no obvious evidence that King Tiger is "award winning". McGeddon (talk) 19:45, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete This is the worst article I've ever seen. The entire thing is original research and most "sources" just link to home pages which say absolutely nothing about this person. This is a major WP:BLP violation. Me5000 (talk) 20:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, ~~verging on~~ Speedy G3 (hoax), G11 (unambiguous promo). Sources don't seem to bear out the claims made, such as #1 on the Dominican Republic music charts sourced to the main site for the country. This article was previously speedied a couple weeks ago with the explanation: "(G3: Blatant hoax: Not a single source I checked backed any of the claims to notability (songs charting, magazine coverage, etc)).[1] Crow^Caw 21:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See also King Tiger (Musician)... Crow^Caw 21:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also see also King Tiger (Recording Artist). This pattern is starting to ring familiar. Flipping to speedy. Crow^Caw 21:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the claims have been dialled down each time, after repeated initial speedying as obvious hoaxes. This particular article has already backed down from "ranked as the Top 10 Hot New [etc etc] by Billboard Chart" to "ranked as Top 100 Hot New [etc etc] by Number 1 Music Chart". --McGeddon (talk) 22:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Turned my speedy back into a regular delete. Since this has been open for a few days, I say lets let it run its course. That way we have CSD-G4 in pocket as well as the likely G5 from the socks. Crow^Caw 21:11, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - To be frank, the article looks like nonsense right now. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 23:28, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not a notable rapper.--Eat me, I'm a red bean _(discuss)^(contribs) 23:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete by all means as this article has so many holes, it makes Swiss cheese look minor. If it hadn't been nominated, I would've AfD or speedied. It's worth mentioning my searches found not even a shred of good sources. SwisterTwister talk 03:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Hoax, blatantly inflated with false claims. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drastic Universal Records for more of same. JNW (talk) 08:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt all variants. Non-notable. Multiple re-creations and confirmed sockpuppetry. GermanJoe (talk) 08:16, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per above and fails WP:NMUSIC.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While it's not a hoax,[2][3][4] nothing out there suggests subject meets WP:NMUSIC. -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:23, 2 September 2015 (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.