Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TryBishop

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Insularism (talk | contribs) at 20:58, 28 May 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

TryBishop

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Doesn't meet the notability guidelines for inclusion. Most of the footnoted sources don't even mention him, and the others are just lyrics and data listings, and a couple of bare mentions. A Google search turns up nothing to meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. Largoplazo (talk) 01:45, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am a hip hop fan who writes articles only about the artists and producers whom I feel are notable, so I am not being reckless. TryBishop's peers who are clearly on the same level of notability as him have their own Wikipedia articles too.
  • Are you saying we should nominate everything else for deletion then? By your criteria, half of all hip hop artists and producers on Wikipedia fail this policy, which is inherently unclear. Should I help you nominate everything else for deletion then? Let's take WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:GNG seriously and see half of all Wikipedia hip-hop articles get deleted. I'm ready to help you out on this one. Insularism (talk) 02:05, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm saying that every article about a non-notable topic is subject to deletion, with notability defined through Wikipedia's guidelines on the subject. That isn't my opinion, that's a statement of Wikipedia's policy that articles be about notable topics. If there are other artists you feel inclined, in good faith, to nominate for deletion based on a failure to meet the guidelines, you should do so. Largoplazo (talk) 02:21, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am very familiar with the Midwest hip-hop scene. You and most other Wikipedia members are not. I know who is notable and who is not in this niche. TryBishop is on par with many other hip-hop artists with Wikipedia articles. This is an obvious fact. I know for certain that this article does not deserve deletion. I know better than to write up an article about some random wannabe rapper kid with no online presence. Do the research for yourself. Insularism (talk) 02:36, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:GNG says, "Reliable" means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability. CHECK.
  • WP:GNG says, "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. CHECK.
  • WP:GNG "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. CHECK.
  • WP:GNG "Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, CHECK.
  • Notable? CHECK. That's how I know this is a keep. You, on the other hand, did not actually read the fine print in WP:GNG, did you? I know how to write neutral, reliable articles about hip-hop artists. I know which ones deserve articles and which ones do not. I know which ones are notable and which ones are not. Insularism (talk) 02:41, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • TryBishop has YouTube videos with over a million views. He has worked very closely with T-Pain and Jeezy. And so many other top rappers. Anyone who actually knows something about the hip-hop scene would be pretty darn sure that TryBishop is "notable," not just another wannabe rapper kid. Insularism (talk) 02:48, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You won't find that Wikipedia lists "I know this field and you don't" among the notability criterion. If people in the field find him noteworthy, then we need evidence of that, which will generally be in the form of "significant coverage" of the subject in multiple sources meeting the above criteria—among which you omitted "significant coverage", yet that criterion is indispensable. As I said earlier, "Most of the footnoted sources don't even mention him, and the others are just lyrics and data listings, and a couple of bare mentions". Largoplazo (talk) 02:57, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • We do have significant coverage. Check the references and check online. And you understand what Wikipedia is? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where the goal is to collaborate on writing up notable topics of use to its intended audience. TryBishop's article is useful to people who are reading about hip hop in the Midwest. He is considered notable by people who would even care to read about such articles in the first place. That is the whole purpose and point of WP:GNG, which is to let us know that we should constructively build a useful encyclopedia that wouldn't be drowned out by random articles about non-notable high school rappers. This article is certainly useful to anyone interested in Midwest hip-hop. And check the Wikipedia:WikiProject Hip Hop page. I am ready to go through all of Wikipedia's policies to show you why this article deserves to be kept. To anyone involved in Midwest hip-hop, this is common sense. Insularism (talk) 03:05, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • TryBishop is useful and notable enough for people who are coming onto Wikipedia to find out more about Midwest hip-hop. This article makes a positive contribution to the encyclopedia. Do not let literalist interpretations of vague rules like WP:GNG prevent us from making this little part of Wikipedia useful to its intended audience. TryBishop is useful information for the Midwest hip-hop crowd. His beginning rapper neighbor or dog or cat might not. Ready to keep now? Insularism (talk) 03:20, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Going through your talk page at User talk:Largoplazo, it's clear as day that you also have your own history of questionable judgments. You accepted other articles that probably should not have been on Wikipedia, but you are asking for this one to be deleted. I do not see any solid arguments or reasonable judgment on your side. Insularism (talk) 03:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • DELETE - Subject fails all notability including WP:MUSIC. The coverage referenced here is not coverage but trivial mention at best. 'His name appears' does not constitute signifant coverage. A news search recommended trying 'tray bishop'. Eight pages of google search did not reveal any coverage. WP:SUBNOT advises that such articles should not exist. Wikipedia is not the place to discover the hidden gems of the midwest hip hop scene. Set up a web site to do that. ogenstein (talk) 16:24, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; completely fails GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. As has been covered, sources establishing notability must be reliable, independent of the source, and constitute significant coverage. None pass this test. While he's assigning reading, Insularism (talk · contribs) might take a gander at WP:BLUDGEON. —Rutebega (talk) 18:14, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Comment, Please at least consider a Weak keep or Neutral, because the article is certainly useful to its intended audience. This is not about WP:BLUDGEON. I am pointing out the systematic biases of Wikipedia from a normal person's perspective, which is plain obvious at Criticism_of_Wikipedia#Systemic_bias_in_coverage. Wikipedia is undeniably biased towards richer, more educated, white male interests. You say that TryBishop does not have significant coverage, but you need to know that a less notable educated white scientist would have more coverage due to America's systematically biased press. An African-American rapper from Flyover Country is obviously going to get less coverage than a New York business magnate, but that doesn't make the African-American any less notable because he is considered to be notable in his niche. This article would be quite useful to people truly interested in hip-hop history, but none of you care the tiniest bit about that. You cannot apply the same Google results or press coverage criteria to African-American artists from the hood, because there is systematic press coverage exclusion and bias against this group of people. Insularism (talk) 20:51, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • A truly well curated encyclopedia should have notability determined by specialists in the field, not a tiny clique of old-time Wikipedia keyboard warriors with clearly biased interests. This is not your encyclopedia. This is the people's encyclopedia. I am taking a civil approach towards actually improving this encyclopedia, as opposed to fanatical deletionists who are cherrypicking inherently inconsistent rules so that they can push their own agenda without any transparency at all. Without any knowledge of the subject matter, the deletionists keep citing WP:GNG and WP:N-whatever to push their own deletionist agendas, which I can easily counter with 10 times as many Wikipedia guidelines and policies that are equally valid. Insularism (talk) 20:51, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please read this article. https://boingboing.net/2017/02/16/40-of-wikipedia-is-under-thre.html Hip-hop stubs are always being picked on by Wikipedia deletionists who don't know about or care about African-American hip-hop, even artists that are known to be locally notable. Some of TryBishop's videos has received over 1 million views on YouTube, and he has worked very closely with the country's most famous hip-hop artists. He is clearly notable in his niche. If this article gets deleted, then we would really have to sit down and consider whether Wikipedia is really as free, unbiased, and uncensored as it really clams to be. It's a shame that these silly deletion attempts have to happen to such articles on Wikipedia. Insularism (talk) 20:51, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/TryBishop&oldid=899257438"