Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sugaspott

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. postdlf (talk) 15:50, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sugaspott

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

Fails WP:MUSIC, contested PROD. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:01, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:06, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable musician. Keb25 (talk) 19:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/DO NOT delete. At least until an african based admin who may understand the problem of sourcing content and verifying truly whether something is notable or not is able to at least relay that the article may be notable to a particular region in africa "Mutare" to be specific. i do remember seeing somewhere in the wiki guidlines i think WP:Music or something like that where it mentioned that if a musician is relevant locally then they are notable and i feel as if that it would apply at least to the population of mutare and the entire region of manicaland, i mean we are talking of a fact where there are no online chart records that exist for zimbabwe, there are no archives that exist online for the regional newspaper that has constantly covered news about sugaspott and that paper is called "Manica Post", i tried to go through their archive system and in case its my fault i encountered an error where it would not let me go before 2008. these examples of infrastructural problems may be quite easily addressed by individuals familiar to the environment. i managed to get in touch with sugaspott as he left me a message on here and he was impressed with what i did with his name [wikispott/sugaspott - get it ?] and we got to talking as i was and still am a fan

its sad that he believes that i can never proove any of what i say and so i should quit, apparently he has himself tried to write a wiki article that he said ended up foul mouthed as he felt missunderstood. i understand now as well as we are from the same region mutare and another admin reallyhicks or something similar said it felt like i have a cause, thing is if i am successful which i am still faithful to the belief that i will be, i hope to continue but only this time maybe this escapade will put me in good stead with the admins on here so they realise that i dont think he is notable to america but surely you must accept he is notable to mutare Wikispott (talk) 03:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - While I appreciate that online coverage might be sparse for a Zimbabwean artist, the facts are that he is an unsigned artist, and he has lived in the UK since 2005 according to the article. The UK music scene is rather well covered, but I can find no coverage about him in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And by the same logic he would not be covered by the UK music scene as they cover UK artists but anyhow the point i was trying to make was that do you mean to say there are no rap artists from zimbabwe ? i could list a number who would be (subject to debate but possible nonetheless) deemed better than their uk counterparts - because there is little of no information about them online doesent necessarilly mean theyre irrelevant you know so while i agree that artists must be deemed notable to warrant inclusion i think if we are specifically talking about a particular region then people knowledgable in that region should stand up and get those articles together so assuming youre a fan who has just listened to a new single on the radio in zimbabwe and are quite lucky to have internet in zimbabwe is it then acceptable that no information is available because a first world (lucky you guys) citizen has deemed them less notable than katy perry or lady gaga ??? well i for one thinks its illogical to restrict information on that grounds and once again if you read the article we go ahead to stipulate that in the circumstances that are specific to zimbabwean rappers and their relevance, he has proportionally managed to warrant inclusion... besides there arent any "signed" zimbabwean hiphop artists.

to further my point in case there are any real hiphop fans or people who assume they can tell good music from bad i will list 10 artists whose music is world class but are restricted by the fact that they arent american/english/australian lol here goes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLduxqw0k_E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRvPz-mFA_I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaXYZ0h4SII

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMTiedrV9Wg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waSiTpKvM7E

a sample of five artists who should merit inclusion because they have basically helped to try and create the reach of hiphop to a wider audience than is normally achievable and by this i mean they are being industrious with their ability to harness the internet and or opportunities that come with their music and that should be notable and i am positive there a probably places with worse infrastructure (i dont know for a fact but off the top of my head i will go with somalia as an example) but i refuse to believe that they dont have hiphop scenes or artists who are trying to get big and are probably relevant in say mogadishu or something like that

i guess its not their fault that there is no RIAA or CATCO or PPL or PRS or equivalents in zimbabwe you know

i dont know man, food for thought Wikispott (talk) 22:59, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Reliable sources. That is what is needed. The discussion is not about whether his music is good or bad, or whether they are industrious on the internet. It is about meeting the Wikipedia inclusion criteria, referred to as notability. That hasn't been demonstrated. -- Whpq (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Response And Further Commentary - RE whpq - understood since day one and i guess i tend to go round in circles - the point i made above reflects that because of the bad infrastructure situation there is no way of finding sources credible enough under the same rules that govern american artists - for exmple BMI PPL PRS ASCAP AllMussic - so if the wiki policies are as flexible as they try and make out then surely you would understand that an artist coming from an area with little or no internet coverage does not mean they arent nootable right ? because to that entire population some of whom do not know about eminem, 50cent and others should be given a chance to find articles about the artists relevant to them, i guess my only conclusion is that a draft should be created outlining policies by which sources can be delimited to their specific subject on a case by case basis ie if 25tolyf spent 18 weeks on number one in zimbabwe in 2010 but it is undocumented online, an article that is then made on wikipedia shouldnt be at the mercy of a lady gaga fan who is also an admin to decide to delete this article because they 1) do not know 25tolyf's music or 2) "reliable" sources arent available// find me a source that details the current top 10 in zimbabwe presently or are you going to say they arent relevant simply because the powers that be in zimbabwe arent transparent enough to allow freedom of information// the idea of redrafting the policies by which inclusion of artists is merited may give greater strength to the categories section ie an article may not exist without categories and it is by those categories notability is measured eg if you are american in order to be notable lets say you prove it by billboard and ascap and bmi ranks etc if your uk based then you prove it by catco and prs and ppl ranks etc and so what if youre angolan, which has a big scene too but i guess articles must come up and a satelite radio brainwashed admin will probably decide it in the better interest of wikipedia to delete it or maybe as i suspect better their workrate on what must be some scale to see who is a more efficient wiki admin ...anyway

in case i rambled on too much again, i think the best way to proceed logically is for a list of what sources are reliable enough for artists that fall under the category of zimbabwean hiphop as this "sugaspott" does in a way that doesent purposely exclude him without falling victim to any holistic sort of prejudice. Wikispott (talk) 22:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- - There is no prejudice. Sugaspott fails WP:MUSIC and WP:GNG, it's clear cut. It matters not that no one in Zimbabwe has heard of Lady Gaga, there are enough reliable sources to be found that make her notable. It matters not that no one in America (or Britain for that matter) has heard of Sugaspott, there are not enough reliable sources to be found that make him notable. If an artist is notable, they will have reliable sources somewhere. If they are not, they won't. We are not making up new policies that specifically fit to this one case, which does not even deserve an exception. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:50, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- - youre right about that there isint prejudice and that sugaspott fails WP:MUSIC but youre missing my point.

i am saying that under WP:MUSIC then no zimbabwean/somalian/angolan/drc/ artists are notable because there isint enough resources online unlike their american counterparts so maybe the need to restructure WP:MUSIC to deal less aggressively in certain categories because its unfair as a whole

lol to the misinterpretation because any other reader will be swayed by your comments to believe that i was trying to say wikipedia should include people on the basis of who has heard them and where they have been heard Wikispott (talk) 20:43, 5 May 2011 (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.