Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B.Boy Omega

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. (X! · talk) · @952 · 21:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B.Boy Omega[edit]

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

Pure Vanity Page XLR8TION (talk) 08:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Pure vanity page. No references.--XLR8TION (talk) 08:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While of very poor quality, I cannot see the vanity in this article. The guy exists, has had an article in the New York Times, is cited by at least one book author (quite extraordinary for a hip-hop artist, I daresay) and has developed and conducted a city tour which someone else found interesting enough to make a movie from. All that is referenced, albeit syntactically poor. Article needs work, not deletion. --Pgallert (talk) 09:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. JBsupreme (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This might just pass notability guidelines, but this low-quality article was created by the WP:SPA Orlando galos(contrib log: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Orlando_galos), which is clearly the same person as the rapper in question since the article states that as the rapper's real name, which constitutes WP:AUTOBIO. The anonymous IP address that did all the other edits only has contributions to this particular article, making it very likely that it belongs to the same person. Smocking (talk) 21:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article may be of poor quality b/c not everyone is versed in wikipedias standards, but the fact is that this is a real person who does have an article in the New York Times, Vibe Magazine and is quoted by a book author; that has to stand for something. Many of the other sources are I believe up are up to standards and are still being developed. Lets be paitent and give it some time. If you can add to the objectivity of the writing than please do so. Lets not be so quick to deleate and catagorize something as "vanity" when it indeed may be legit.
- Comment The above !vote was also left by 146.203.126.241, as was the one below. VernoWhitney (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This person should not be catorgized as a rapper but as a journalist and historian but the references make it noteworthy of a stub nothing more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.203.126.241 (talk) 04:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article was created 16 days ago. And had been in existence only 10 days before the nominator put it up for deletion. The AfD policy is being misused here! More appropriate options are warranted. AWhiteElk (talk) 04:16, 25 February 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.