Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jorja Smith

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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:21, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jorja Smith

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

Notability not established. With no major news coverage outside of his hometown. His entire discography consists of a guest spot for one song (interlude does not count, as the two songs combine into one larger one) on someone else's album, which was not even a single. Kellymoat (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notability absolutely established. The user nominating for deletion has misgendered the artist repeatedly, has not looked at the substantial list of sources on an artist who is tipped by the BBC as one of the breakthrough acts of 2017. She also appears in two tracks on one of the most successful albums of this year. Presumably Kellymoat does not believe that the BBC, Billboard, Evening Standard, Guardian constitute 'news coverage outside of his hometown'??? This is a totally spurious deletion request and the article should be kept. Jwslubbock (talk) 16:29, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep This is a really strange nomination, especially given the references provided, the nominator's inability to gender her correctly, and how close it is to the creation of the article. I am wondering, in fact, if the nominator has an agenda of some sort against the subject? Anyway, in terms of my reasoning to keep, I point to the substantial coverage via reliable sources such as BBC News ([1]), DIY Magazine ([2]), The Fader ([3]), Music Week ([4]), Clash ([5] and [6]), The Evening Standard ([7]), DIY again ([8]), BillBoard ([9]) and more. Many of these are dedicated profiles. Jorja has also been a credited artist (albeit a feature) on a UK Top 40 hit. She is also scheduled to headline a stage at Latitude Festival ([10]). She's also had passing mentions in Metro, The Guardian and more. None of these publications are based in her hometown (Walsall, near Birmingham). I'm just really confused by this adamant nomination but she clearly meets WP:NMUSIC due to the wealth of coverage. Finally, she meets criteria #7 of WP:MUSICBIO too due to her features on BBC Radio 1 (e.g. [11] and [12]) in which she appeared as the focus of broadcasts. KaisaL (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per rational provided above. I think to say the nominator had some sort of "agenda" is a reach. I would argue (as someone who has been guilty of this myself) the nominator probably saw the name, didn't take the time to determine whether the singer was male or female, saw "2016-present" in the info box, and immediately went for CSD. The research done by Kaisal above is enough for me to believe this passes WP:MUSICBIO and should be kept. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 22:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG, WP:NMUSIC per the BBC interview. Don't think nom has an 'agenda,' Those comments are totally inappropriate here, and would best be stricken. Remember WP:AGF. SW3 5DL (talk) 02:14, 3 April 2017 (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.