Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walker T

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. Waggers TALK 09:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Walker T[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

An individual that does not appear to pass the WP:GNG. None of the sources currently in the article are valid for establishing notability, being database listings. Searches for both his stage name and real name did not turn up any significant coverage in reliable sources. The article was WP:PRODed way back in 2014 but was contested, so bringing it to AFD. Rorshacma (talk) 23:27, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Rorshacma (talk) 23:27, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Jamaica and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Well, he has 0 monthly listeners on Spotify [1]. The only link I can find is unrelated [2]. Delete for lack of sourcing; feel bad for the guy might just go give his Spotify a listen.Oaktree b (talk) 02:14, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The article was created in 2014 by User:ReggaeMusicWriter, who is either Walker T himself or an associate, and that user has done nothing in Wikipedia outside of Walker T. Meanwhile, props to Walker T for proclaiming himself a "Reggae Superstar" but nobody in the reliable music media has said the same, or much else about him either. This article is clearly a promotional attempt that fell through the cracks here for a long time, but better late than never. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:42, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG quite miserably. Best, GPL93 (talk) 11:52, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: sounds like an interesting guy, but also an article that is primarily promotional and, more importantly, doesn't fit the guidelines for inclusion. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 11:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:48, 26 October 2023 (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.