Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Velied

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. RL0919 (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Velied

[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)

Cannot see that any of the references are solid enough to establish notability. TheLongTone (talk) 13:09, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:11, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:11, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I was actually in the process of nominating it myself. This individual is far below the required inclusion criteria, the claims of representing the Ukraine in Eurovision are patently false and I can find absolutely no sources to verify the content in this article outside of his own website etc...He has received absolutely no non-trivial, in depth coverage and the claims are well...I don't believe them. It's also pretty suspicious to me that one of the sources is supposedly the Guardian but redirects to YouTube. This is nothing more than a vanity piece that's been ignored and puffed up for years. Praxidicae (talk) 13:12, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually based on that last bit, I'm convinced this might qualify for G3, hoax. The sources they've chosen to prove he was "on Eurovision" are just completely fake, as are the certifications and literally every other claim that would avert an A7. Praxidicae (talk) 13:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I actually believe a speedy delete per g3 is far more appropriate now. An AFD would be fine to discuss the merits of an article that isn't completely fabricated. Praxidicae (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete Blatant vanity page. Promotional. No RS. ShelbyMarion (talk) 14:40, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not even close to being a notable musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:09, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Based on Praxidicae's reasoning, it wouldn't just be a G3 situation but also likely an A7 as the subject is a musician with no actual claim to notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:55, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Was about to endorse deletion under criterion A7 since there is no credible claim to significance, but I see that an administrator has already declined a speedy. Might as well let the AfD run to its inevitable conclusion. decltype (talk) 12:29, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails all notability guidelines WP:GNG, WP:MUSICBIO, WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC, etc. - the article creator is indefinitely blocked for abusing multiple accounts, which doesn't bode well - Epinoia (talk) 22:19, 12 September 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.