Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike 171

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. Randykitty (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mike 171[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)

"Articles that breach Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons" Per WP:BLP, potentially contentious claims are not allowed regardless of they are negative, neutral or positive. Assertion like he "dominated" must be reliably referenced. There's no inline citation for anything in this article and it merits a deletion. It also appears to be created by a connected contributor too. Graywalls (talk) 20:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 20:19, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 20:19, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Needs heavy reworking for neutrality, but shouldn't be deleted. Claims must be cited, but book-based sources are valid, and a quick google search gives a personal twitter page that may provide more content for an article. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SJK 171 also gives precedent for keeping through WP:SSEFAR. 400spartans (talk) 21:53, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SJK 171's nomination was withdrawn by the nominator. Both the SJK 171 and MIKE 171 were created by the same editor. Although a problem was noted with the SJK 171's article. About two paragraphs of the contents prior to the most recent changes were word-for-word identical with the subject's website suggesting that it was an auto bio. That article also contained citations for claims that failed verification. Aside from claims not cited as required for WP:BLP, it also appears that there might be an issue on whether the subject MIKE 171 meets the general notability requirements. Graywalls (talk) 01:13, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:11, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 22:04, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find any SIGCOV. In fact all I can find is a a short quote in New York Magazine, and a repeatedly republished passing mention: " (a film) featuring narration from John Waters and interviews with graffiti artists who go by names like Taki 183, Mike 171, SJK 171, and Cornbread." Reference fail.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:33, 10 May 2019 (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.