Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yung Gleesh

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:51, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yung Gleesh

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

This music biography was previously deleted on August 18, 2015. The user who restarted it is a user who registered an account one week later. There are no references to establish notability, and per WP:BEFORE I have been unable to find any reliable sources describing his career to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO. Unfortunately, the news accounts of Yung Gleesh are about his skirmish with the law. He was accused of rape[1] and then charged and arrested in March 2015.[2] In September 2015 he described how the charges messed up his career.[3] However, he was not convicted and so he is not deserving of a biography as a criminal. I just don't think there's enough music stuff here to host a rapper article, and not enough to host a criminal article. Binksternet (talk) 23:07, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with Binksternet points. Fails WP:Notability (people). Cbs527 (talk) 02:50, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above, but could you provide diffs regarding your accusations of sockpuppeteering? If this is a WP:DUCK it should quack like one. Jergling (talk) 20:28, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Got no diffs for ya. The editor starts lots of borderline articles, many of which get nominated for deletion, like this one—the trail is visible on the user talk page. It was suspicious to me that the username was registered so soon after the last Yung Gleesh article was deleted, but I didn't find anything else to establish a sockpuppet case. Binksternet (talk) 23:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a snowball's chance in hell, nothing at all actually significant since the works are minor and unconvincing, the information and sources are trivial and unconvincing, there's literally nothing else and this simply follows the classic example of what's barely in the barrel of "information". SwisterTwister talk 01:23, 16 November 2016 (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.