Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Velous

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 keep. Kurykh (talk) 05:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Velous[edit]

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

Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:MUSICBIO. Very little biographical information in secondary sources; too little to support notability. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Xaxing (talk) 02:08, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Easily per WP:MUSICBIO#8: A person may be notable if he "has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy." Velous is a multiple-Grammy nominated musician, as the producer of Kanye West songs.[1][2][3] In fact, he seems to qualify on WP:BASIC too, given the coverage in these sources. Pinging the nominator to find out if they'll consider withdrawing the nomination. Thanks. Lourdes 12:04, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Of the three sources listed by User:Lourdes to support Velous' "Grammy nominations":

The first only says that Kanye West is "eyeing a 2016 Grammy win for the song" for his song "All Day".
The second is an interview with Velous (primary source) where it states that Kanye West's song "All Day" ended up "netting a couple of GRAMMY nominations".
The third source listed says one line "Grammy nominated producer Velous". Yes? Prove it.

These two reliable sources about Kanye West's "All Day", [4] and [5], do not even mention Velous.

As well, the second sentence of the Velous Wikipedia article states that Velous co-produced Kanye West's hit single "All Day", yet the first source supporting this does not even mention Kanye West, and the second source is a dead link.

It's disappointing that these slight-of-hand "Grammy nominations" appear so often on otherwise non-notable rapper-producer articles. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Magnolia677. If you feel that Grammy nominated artists should not have a Wikipedia page, you should go and discuss the same at the WP:MUSICBIO notability guidelines page rather than reject the guideline. You should not disregard a guideline or ask editors who provide reliable sources to, in your own words, "prove it". For your benefit, all the following sources address Velous as a Grammy nominated artist. Here they are (for your information again, MUSICBIO only asks for references documenting the Grammy nomination; significant coverage is not required by MUSICBIO):

The main Grammy.com nomination page lists Velous as a nominee (Go to page 14, Category 24, and see Tyler Bryant, Velous' original name.)
Billboard.com's 2016 Grammy nomination list has Velous (Tyler Bryant) as a nominee.
CBS, "New Song Alert: Velous ft. French Montana... this Grammy-nominated producer is well on his way with this one."
Vibe, "Grammy nominated producer Velous has been hard at work"
The Source, "The Brooklyn phenom teams up with Grammy-nominated producer Velous to create a club banger."
XXL Mag, "All Day, which helped Velous snag two Grammy nominations."
Respect-Mag, "...featuring Multi-Grammy Nominated producer, Velous."
Hip Hop Weekly, "Producer is velous (Grammy nominated for all day by Kanye...)"
All Hip Hop, "With production from Kanye West and J. Cole’s Grammy nominated producer turned rapper, Velous..."
The Dose Music, "Today the Grammy Nominated Producer/Rapper Velous releases a new banger..."
This-Is-50, "The upper side legend, Grammy Nominated, and coke boys finest Tyler Bryant AKA Velous"
HipHop87, "Grammy-nominated producer Velous enlists French Montana"
HipHop87 again, "After snagging two Grammy nods for producing Kanye West’s “All Day,” Velous decides to get behind the mic this time."

Magnolia, Velous' song has charted (peak rank #2) on Billboard's top streamed songs' charts, and his video has premiered exclusively on Billboard.[6] This artist's nominations are clearly not a "slight-of-hand" (or did you mean "sleight-of-hand"). i do hope you consider searching for more sources yourself, before nominating articles like these. Thanks. Lourdes 18:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These sources are mostly a load of one-liners that mention his name, and sometimes embellish that with "Grammy nominated". Oh please. This source nailed it, showing that Velous was one of a whopping 22 names listed as nominees for the Grammy. 22 names! Hardly notable. And regarding this source demonstrating a charted song, it shows that it was J. Cole's song, not his. There are hundreds of online music magazines, many of them likely owned by the music companies, puffing up the "notability" of these rappers and producers. Does there exist one significant secondary sourced biography for Velous? Magnolia677 (talk) 19:23, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Magnolia677, MUSICBIO only requires confirmation of the multiple Grammy nominations, not significant coverage (which is a requirement of GNG). Let me clarify:

GNG and SNG exist for separate reasons. The reason WP:SNG exists is to provide notability guidelines alternative to GNG. If MUSICBIO also required significant coverage for all its alternatives, what would be the logic in having MUSICBIO anyway?! While GNG requires significance of coverage, MUSICBIO does not require that for all its various alternatives. So when you write "These sources are mostly a load of one-liners", I think you are mistakenly superimposing the requirements of GNG on MUSICBIO. The fact that these sources confirm that Velous is Grammy nominated (including the main Grammy.com source) is enough to satisfy MUSICBIO.
Your statement: "This source nailed it, showing that Velous was one of a whopping 22 names listed as nominees for the Grammy. 22 names! Hardly notable" seems a call to emotion rather than a guideline. It doesn't matter if 22 others have got nominated. The fact that Velous has got nominated is enough for MUSICBIO requirement to be met. Also, your statement: "This source demonstrating a charted song, it shows that it was J. Cole's song, not his" is plainly illogical. Velous is the producer of the JCole song. His charting was shown by me to show how your claim of the musician being unremarkable is wrong. You seem to be interpreting sources mistakenly, as per your liking, to be honest.
There are anyway multiple sources like MTV ("Meet Velous, he made the original beat that eventually became Kanye West's All Day"), HipHopDX ("How Velous Became One Of "The Life Of Pablo's" Secret (And Deadly) Weapons"), Zumic ("10 Things We Learned About Velous, Co-Producer of Kanye’s “All Day,..."), Upcoming100 ("Meet Velous, the young producer who has caught the ear of Drake, Kanye and French Montana") etc which discuss the subject quite enough in the context of WP:BASIC (BASIC is also different from GNG, lest you should again superimpose the two requirements). But then, BASIC is not the main argument here anyway.

In all, the requirement of MUSICBIO is already met by Velous' multiple Grammy nominations - which now you accept has been "proved". And MUSICBIO does not require significant coverage. I would repeat one last time - if you require MUSICBIO to include significant coverage, go to the guidelines' page and get the guideline changed. It's not perhaps appropriate to misinterpret the MUSICBIO guideline to your liking. Thanks. Lourdes 02:09, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, WP:MUSICBIO says "may be notable" if they meet those criteria. The "may" was intentionally included, probably so that one of the 22 nominees for a single Grammy Award wouldn't be rubber stamped for a Wikipedia article. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thankful that you've finally accepted that MUSICBIO doesn't require significant coverage. All our notability guidelines only provide presumptions of notability and not definite confirmations. For example, even WP:GNG only uses "presumed to be notable" rather than "is notable". The "may" in MUSICBIO was not included for the reasons you mention. It was included so that editors may discuss the applicability of a particular guideline on individual subjects, as we are currently doing. You mention: "one of the 22 nominees for a single Grammy Award wouldn't be rubber stamped for a Wikipedia article". I think you continue to ignore the fact that Velous is not just another Grammy nominee. I've repeatedly shown how he qualifies on BASIC and also how his produced song has topped the Billboard charts. Nevertheless, unlike what you mention, as per MUSICBIO, all Grammy nominees are presumed to be notable because of the significance of Grammys and the importance that a Grammy nomination confers on them. I have to again repeat, if you feel that not all Grammy nominees should be presumed notable, please go ahead and get the guidelines changed. It doesn't matter whether you or I believe a Grammy nomination is unimportant. The guideline exists and is applicable here. Anyway, I think we both have made our points. Thanks. Lourdes 04:40, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - Topic's affliation with Kanye West's hit single "All Day" is already enough for notability. Charted in 14 countries, satisfies criterion 2. Gold-certified in the US, satisfies criterion 3. Per WP:N, a topic is presumed to merit an article if - "It meets the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline". This topic meets the WP:MUSICBIO criteria. - TheMagnificentist 19:27, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add that to the article with a source, or provide a source here? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the same to the article. Thanks. Lourdes 14:54, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - With all the sources provided by the other editors in this discussion, it is only right for this article to stay put. LilNumerator (talk) 17:35, 14 February 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.