Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punch (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 no consensus. No real discussion of the newly provided sources despite two relists. Only comment addressed only one of the sources. So Why 09:40, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Punch (rapper)[edit]

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

There is no question this person is a successful businessman and respected voice in the music industry. However, the sources cited are either primary source interviews, or make passing mention of this person with regards to his opinion of others. A Google search for secondary biographical sources about this person was not successful.

Several of the sources cited confirm that he is co-president of Top Dawg Entertainment, and that this has been his primary work:

"He’s laid low in recent years to focus on his TDE presidency". [1]
"TDE President Terrence “Punch” Henderson has been best known for his work behind the scenes with Top Dawg Ent." [2]

Being co-president of this company does not automatically affirm notability, per WP:BIO.

There also appears to be no notability per WP:MUSICBIO. There are no charted songs, no award nominations, and no multiple albums--each of which would have contributed to notability.

Gleaning the articles cited, there are just a few biographical notes about this person:

"Punch understands this side of rapping because he’s an MC as well." [3]
"Punch's urge comes from a need to educate audiences with thought-provoking and insightful lyrics, something he takes pride in." [4]

Overall, this article appears to fail WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:MUSICBIO. Magnolia677 (talk) 09:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:29, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD 20 14 02:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- unremarkable career; nothing stands out here to warrant an encyclopedia article. Sources are insufficient to meet WP:BIO. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - while accomplished, that does not necessarily equate to notability. Searches did not turn up the type of coverage to show that they pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:21, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, I was about to close this but look at these sources: [5][6][7][8] from major publications... (some mentioned in nom) And that's not counting hotnewhiphop.com—haven't looked into the site's reliability. Trim unreliable sources if you must, but this individual is definitely covered for his career, and if a merger is more appropriate, a redirect to Top Dawg Entertainment (his company) certainly makes more sense than deletion. czar 16:54, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, hotnewhiphop.com openly solicits promotional content. That's not saying everything there is unreliable or unworthy. Just pointing out that they open the door for self-promoting content laking objective, third party POV. Take that info for what it's worth. The notability merits of references from hotnewhiphop should be assessed on case by case basis. ShelbyMarion (talk) 20:43, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to discuss the new information provided by Czar.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 21:05, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See last relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 11:43, 12 July 2017 (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.