Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bmcabana SF (2nd nomination)

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Considering a reevaluation of the first discussion after discounting the comments of sockpuppets, and the discovery of a likely paid editing operation, as well as drafts of the article being repeatedly rejected, there is an overwhelming consensus that this person is not sufficiently

salted. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:43, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Bmcabana SF

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

Recently recreated article about an artist which does not meet

WP:GNG. Full disclosure, this subject has had a history of sockpuppetry in the AFC space see the history at Draft:Bmcabana SF to the point of the draft space being salted. If this subject is deemed not sufficiently notable for inclusion I do recommend salting this title as well. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 20:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

information Note: as per my close at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bmcabana SF, this is a restart of that discussion, which was badly disrupted by IP's, new accounts, single purpose accounts. I have recreated the AfD (as a 2nd nomination) using the original nomination statement, above; I have re-timestamped the comment in line with the creation of this AfD. This discussion page will be semi-protected, per my notes at the close of AfD1. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 20:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AN, considering the nature of my close of the previous discussion. See diff. Daniel (talk) 23:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:44, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. In addition to the comments above: since salting Draft:Bmcabana SF, a draft has been created at Draft:Bmcabana-SF. This draft was twice turned down at AfC, followed by the article being created directly in mainspace. Fully support salting of all variations of this title. --John B123 (talk) 22:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Source assessment table:
Source
Independent?
Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward
GNG
?
https://www.sondz.com/artist/Bmcabana-SF?gid=dc41a0a9-f76d-4dfe-89f4-091031cda058 ? Page is leading to an error No No No
https://hypemagazine.co.za/music/upcoming-rapper-from-polokwane-015/ Yes Yes No It's a single line No
https://reviewonline-epaper.products.caxton.co.za/wp-content/ftp/epaper_uploads/58/Bonus_Review_29_April_2021/Bonus_Review_29_April_2021.pdf Yes Yes No Feel good article about up and coming local artist not much for details. No
https://roodepoortrecord-epaper.products.caxton.co.za/wp-content/ftp/epaper_uploads/17/Roodepoort_Record_21_May_2021/Roodepoort_Record_21_May_2021-1.pdf Yes Yes No Feel good article about up and coming local artist not much for details No
https://www.sowetanlive.co.za/sebenza-live/2021-07-13-muso-reaps-rewards-after-using-nsfas-cash-to-fund-career/ No It's an interview of the subject. No Yes No
https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/limpopo/pupils-protest-over-school-chairs-1917167 Yes Yes No Does not mention the subject at all. No
https://reviewonline.co.za/58546/learners-left-in-the-lurch-at-luthuli/ Yes Yes No Does not mention the subject at all. No
https://reviewonline.co.za/449228/talent-hunter-productions-presents-the-centre-stage-limpopo-talent-competition/ Yes No This is a reprint of a press release No Does not mention the subject at all. No
https://www.dailysun.co.za/News/thugs-hide-in-abandoned-house-20200623 Yes Yes No Does not mention the subject at all. No
https://buckrollbeats.com/ No This is a sales site. No No No
https://www.miramax.com/movie/Tsotsi/ No No This is the film site which does not list the subject or mention him. No No
https://www.shapeslewisham.co.uk/badraccoonmedia/ Yes No Business listing No No
https://www.sagoodnews.co.za/when-the-going-is-tough-the-tough-get-going/ Yes No This looks to be a personal blog by some guy named Steuart, lacking effective editorial oversight. No No
https://briefly.co.za/49573-angry-seshego-community-members-burn-shop-anti-crime-protest.html Yes Yes No does not mention the subject at all No
https://hypemagazine.co.za/music/bmcabana-talks-partnership-with-tunecore-and-acting/ No No This site accepts content from anyone, no indication of effective editorial oversight. No No
https://twitter.com/bmcabanasf No it's Twitter No No No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
  • This assessment table was not assessed on all source links provided, some of the links have been improved, The ASSESSMENT WAS BEFORE THE SECOND NOMINATION, I would advise to go assess the sources from the article, this assessment is was conducted by one user firstZefu zungu (06:44 PM, 05 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the updates I have added in the new references from the article to the table. If anyone disagrees with any of the assessments they are free to disagree and post the reasons as the table is meant to act as a gauge of consensus. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The artist did an interview with the south african news giant The Sowetan [1] and its a reliable source. the newspaper is also available on pressreader.comZefu zungu (11:01 PM, 04 August 2021 (UTC)
The
WP:GNG requires multiple third party sources. An interview would be a single first party one. That's not enough. Sergecross73 msg me 23:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
The table was the good work of Mcmatter not me. --John B123 (talk) 14:38, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Salt Does not meet
    WP:GNG per the "Source assessment table" by Mcmatter to this point there are no keep votes with Wikipedia viable arguments. Jeepday (talk) 17:34, 5 August 2021 (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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.