Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sifu Versus
- 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. I find the reason for keeping this article outweighed by Ginsengbomb's analysis. Further I would advise Green Cardamom to think carefully before accusing another editor of Bad Faith nominations. If you believe that you have "proof" of sockpuppetry, take them to WP:SPI -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sifu Versus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete. The notability of this subject seems dubious here, and I'm pretty sure this fails WP:MUSIC. JBsupreme (talk) 06:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. There are a lot of non-notable music articles (WP:GARAGE), this is not one of them. Nominator did not explain reason for deletion. Also nominator may be using multiple accounts to stack votes, which I can probably prove if an admin wants to contact me in private. Green Cardamom (talk) 06:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Excuse me, but what the fuck are you talking about? I happen to know plenty of CheckUser administrators here, if you're going to make claims like that you better back it up. Furthermore I just said this fails WP:MUSIC, that would be my rationale. What's yours? We're not a hosting facility for vanity myspace pages, sorry. JBsupreme (talk) 07:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Seems kinda strange that a red-link newbie is engaging in AFD's and "knows plenty of CheckUser admins". Surely this is not your first and/or only account, why the multiple accounts? Green Cardamom (talk) 21:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Excuse me, but what the fuck are you talking about? I happen to know plenty of CheckUser administrators here, if you're going to make claims like that you better back it up. Furthermore I just said this fails WP:MUSIC, that would be my rationale. What's yours? We're not a hosting facility for vanity myspace pages, sorry. JBsupreme (talk) 07:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you kidding? The "red-link newbie" you are talking to has 26,900 edits to your ~2,200, has been on Wikipedia almost a year longer than you, and spends a lot of time doing good work in AfD. I run into him a lot on here. Who are you? Your assumption of bad faith in this matter is, frankly, completely despicable, and hilariously unjustified. Maybe next time before you saunter in here and start calling people "red-link newbies" you can a) mind your tone, because that's obnoxious and b) learn to use the Edit Count tool. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 00:29, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WeakDelete The sourcing in the article is either photographs, Myspace page, or is a broken link that I also can't seem to find when I attempt to find the sources via a Google search. GNews reveals a handful of mentions, all in Greek. Attempting to read them shows that, whatever their content is, they each afford Sifu Versus the most trivial of mentions.I'm saying "weak" only because I'm wondering if Hood Magazine and Hip Hop Kinima are actually reliable/verifiable sources that I simply can't find a way to access.I tried a few more ways of seeking out these sources and am still coming up empty. Changing my position from weak delete to a good old fashioned, straight up, undiluted "delete."Regarding the above comment from Green Cardamom, until and unless JBsupreme actually starts stacking votes in this AfD, I'd consider that to be an outrageous thing to say. You should strike that. And the nominator pretty plainly explained a reason for deletion -- failing WP:MUSIC is, you know, reason for deletion. On the other hand, you did not explain a reason for NOT deleting. You just said "this is not non-notable." Either way, no poisoning the well here, please. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 06:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Many sources used on Wikipedia are not readily accessible via the Internet and/or written in English. This is a hard article to verify because 1. One needs to read Greek and 2. The sources are not easily available online. But none of these things are reason to delete the article, they are verification issues. Assume Good Faith before deleting the article and wait for someone else to verify the sources who has access to them and reads Greek. Green Cardamom (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Here's the problem. You don't need to be able to read Greek to identify the nature of the coverage in the sources that -can- be found, because while the sources are in Greek, they all spell out the name of this artist in the recognizable Roman alphabet, and the artist, without exception in all these sources, appears as one name in a list of other names. It is pretty easy to conclude that the coverage is trivial. If the articles were -about- the artist, his name would appear more than once, and not sandwiched in a list with a bunch of other names, no? These are mentions, not coverage.
Regarding the sources "not easily available online," that they are impossible to find doesn't somehow make them reliable/verifiable sourcing, and it's the lack of reliable/verifiable sourcing that gives cause for deletion. I was, however, able to find Hood magazine using the Internet Wayback Machine. It is no longer in existence, none of the article content is available any longer, and it appears to be a non-notable Webzine. Hence, it isn't a usable source for conferring notability. It's not a question of the source being "not readily accessible," it's that the source no longer exists. As for Hip Hop Kinima, it bills itself as a portal. I don't know what to make of it. I can't access it because I need a username and password.
And, nothing personal, but I'm not even touching the irony of you preaching Assume Good Faith, given your grotesque -- and thus far not retracted -- assumption of bad faith concerning the nominator above. If anybody here is acting in extremely bad faith, it is you. AGF doesn't apply to this conversation -- nobody's assuming bad faith in nominating the article for deletion or pointing out the problems with the sourcing. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 00:29, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Here's the problem. You don't need to be able to read Greek to identify the nature of the coverage in the sources that -can- be found, because while the sources are in Greek, they all spell out the name of this artist in the recognizable Roman alphabet, and the artist, without exception in all these sources, appears as one name in a list of other names. It is pretty easy to conclude that the coverage is trivial. If the articles were -about- the artist, his name would appear more than once, and not sandwiched in a list with a bunch of other names, no? These are mentions, not coverage.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 9 March 2010 (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.