Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerald Milton: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:
*'''Delete'''. No indication of any notability at all based on the current content. No record contract, two student awards of unknown notability for something musical, one self-released single of unknown notability, millions get BSc's. Kick his tush and Tush Award out of Wikipedia until he does something notable! [[User:Tiptoethrutheminefield|Tiptoethrutheminefield]] ([[User talk:Tiptoethrutheminefield|talk]]) 02:30, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. No indication of any notability at all based on the current content. No record contract, two student awards of unknown notability for something musical, one self-released single of unknown notability, millions get BSc's. Kick his tush and Tush Award out of Wikipedia until he does something notable! [[User:Tiptoethrutheminefield|Tiptoethrutheminefield]] ([[User talk:Tiptoethrutheminefield|talk]]) 02:30, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
*'''Delete:''' Fails the GNG, WP:BAND. Ya got to wonder why the SPAs bother. [[User talk:NukeThePukes|Nha Trang]] 20:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
*'''Delete:''' Fails the GNG, WP:BAND. Ya got to wonder why the SPAs bother. [[User talk:NukeThePukes|Nha Trang]] 20:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
'''Strongest Delete''': ''Wikipedia policy oriented Comments'': '''Delete''' Obviously fails WP:GNG, WP:MUSIC, WP:ACADEMIC and all other policy I can think of at this moment.

''Non-Wikipedia guidelines related Comments'' - Rubbish article. Everybody wants to sha sing in Nigeria. Someone should please tell these Covenant Kids to go find a cure for Ebola if they want to be notable on Wikipedia. What does the future hold for Nigeria if everyone is going into entertainment? Useless article. Yes I'm angry.

Note: Amadioha will strike anyone that replies me. "runs-away forever".[[User:Darreg|Darreg]] ([[User talk:Darreg|talk]]) 20:27, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:27, 15 October 2014

Gerald Milton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of this BLP fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO, a non-notable musician who has won non-notable awards. Stanleytux (talk) 09:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep obviously as an Artist with a University degree he is an Inspiration to the youths of his society -- Proftalk (talk) 05:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC) Proftalk (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Keep. It's certainly overly promotional at present, but I don't think it's unsalvageable. it could be salvaged by rewriting it in a neutral point of view -- Chieffo (talk) 05:52, 14 October 2014 (UTC) Chieffo (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Speedy keep. I must commend, The article subject is notable and the article contains no inappropriate content. There haven been multiple accounts editing the article, but that does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor (obviously helpful changes, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand)"; allowing the page to remain, with whatever Cumberbatch-related material the banned editor included now expunged, is the most appropriate solution. Playing whack-a-mole with the banned editor has reached the disruptive level -- for example, yesterday a long-term, productive editor, who happens to live in the same metro area as Fairyspit and apparently has a slight editing overlap with them, was blocked as a sock, with scores of their image uploads deleted and many other edits undone, with the blocking admin for the moment unavailable to address the issue; Lady Lotus has removed content from this article declaring the Boston Globe an unreliable source; and, not for the first time, LL has mass-nominated for G5 contributions that clearly predate the ban. Sometimes a selective response is better than a flamethrower.Justblaze54 (talk) 06:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC) Justblaze54 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Strongest Delete: Wikipedia policy oriented Comments: Delete Obviously fails WP:GNG, WP:MUSIC, WP:ACADEMIC and all other policy I can think of at this moment.

Non-Wikipedia guidelines related Comments - Rubbish article. Everybody wants to sha sing in Nigeria. Someone should please tell these Covenant Kids to go find a cure for Ebola if they want to be notable on Wikipedia. What does the future hold for Nigeria if everyone is going into entertainment? Useless article. Yes I'm angry.

Note: Amadioha will strike anyone that replies me. "runs-away forever".Darreg (talk) 20:27, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]