Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ozzmanic

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. Sandstein 17:25, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ozzmanic

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

WP:BLP, with some advertorial undertones, of a musician who has no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC and not enough adequate reliable source coverage to clear WP:GNG. Of the 10 footnotes here, six are primary sources that cannot support notability (i.e. his own self-published profiles on social networking and/or music PR platforms), two are blogs and one is a glancing namecheck of his existence in a WP:ROUTINE concert listing. There's one source here that's potentially acceptable (guardian.ng, #9), but even it reads in part like a mildly rewritten press release rather than a true newspaper article, and it's just bylined "editor" rather than having a journalist's name attached to it. And even if we do accept it as a reliable source, it isn't enough coverage all by itself to get Ozzmanic over GNG if it's the only reliable source in the article. This is also a probable conflict of interest, based on the creator's username Omo007 — but as always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations platform on which emerging musicians get to create articles about themselves to help them try to make it big — it's an encyclopedia on which making it big comes first and then the Wikipedia article follows, not vice versa. Bearcat (talk) 19:22, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:29, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:29, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: not verifiably notable per WP:MUSICIAN. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete another non-notable musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show it passes WP:GNG, and definitely doesn't pass WP:MUSICBIO. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:51, 9 December 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.