Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funky Dee

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. Tone 19:29, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Funky Dee[edit]

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

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

This is one of those musician articles that stretches fortunate connections and inherited notability in an attempt to not seem promotional. Most of the article's current sources are to social media, retail, and industry listing sites. Other sources are about events in which he merely appeared and may not even mention him by name. He has been a guest on a few releases that charted for other people and he has two minor magazine mentions: [1], [2]. Otherwise I can find nothing beyond the usual listings. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 13:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 13:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 13:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. (Article Author). Regardless of the quality of sources, he had a viral hit single in 2009 with over four million plays across YouTube, Spotify and Apple Music and many more offline. Happy to work together to improve the article if needs be. What would deleting this accomplish? --ItsLuke (contribs) 10:19, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:39, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regretful Delete - I wanted to keep this one, but I'm just not seeing anything that's really WP:SIGCOV from a reliable source. The closest is the Trench Magazine mention, but even that's just a bare one. Without that this fails WP:GNG. FOARP (talk) 16:35, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Britishfinance (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete per FOARP. I too was unable to find enough RS to meet the criteria at WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 19:07, 17 November 2019 (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.