Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Garland (Black Panther)

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 redirect to Tupac Shakur. Actually, the consensus is to merge, but since it is unclear whether there is any BLP-sourced material that could be merged, I'm implementing a redirect now to let editors merge any appropriate and sourced content from the history. Sandstein 07:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Garland (Black Panther)[edit]

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

Living person, only claim to notability is that he is somebody else's father. No sourcing except for unreliable websites associated with his son. Barely-sourced problematic BLP statements. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:45, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, notability is not inherited. I'd recommend merging to Tupac Shakur except nothing is cited to a reliable source here (except the Rolling Stone piece, which editors of the Tupac article should take a look at as it doesn't seem to be cited there). Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:23, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. -- JN 466 23:07, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge appopriately sourced material to Tupac Shakur. --JN 466 23:08, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject has notability. He's mention in books and he's been in a documentary called Biggie & Tupac. He also as 829,000 results on Google. --Dogfacebob Dogfacebob 06:23, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Danger (talk) 10:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Well sourced article, the subject is clearly notable enough.--Dogfacebob (Dogfacebob) 22:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC) Double !vote struck out. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Well-sourced"? You must be kidding. Of the three sources cited, one is a dead link, and neither of the other two is even remotely adequate in terms of WP:RS, certainly not when it concerns sensitive and potentially defamatory WP:BLP content. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge referenced material to his sons article. No independent notability.AerobicFox (talk) 03:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no referenced material in this article, because none of the sources is reliable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:55, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - This seems like a fairly straightforward example of the Wikipedia principle that "Notability is not Inherited." Carrite (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. I make special note that the Rolling Stone article is the only reliable source about him. Bearian (talk) 19:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The Rolling Stone "article" is a 404 deadlink. What reliable source are people talking about? Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:52, 22 March 2011 (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.