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. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Gray (Entertainer)[edit]

Daniel_Gray_(Entertainer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

Delete can't see evidence of meeting WP:MUSIC. Notability tags repeatedly removed by anon, and prod tag removed without reason given. Boleyn2 (talk) 10:56, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

}

Don't Delete this is a music artist who has appeared on countless stations and has a very loyal fanbase. He is a major label artist who tours the country and has appeared on various major media outlets such as LOGO, The Advocate Magazine, Out Magazine, and has toured the country. He is an independent artist with major label distribution and his single "Lost & Found" has charted on various music dance music charts such as GBM Music Chart, Starfleet Dance Music Charts, ect. I feel this artist does infact meet the WP:Music standard as he has aquired much non-trivial press coverage and is releasing his album on an important indie label. This artist is known nation wide and has created an impact in indie music, especially in the LGBT dance community. He has received press coverage by media and publications independent from himself such as Expressions Magazine, Pride Source Magazine, Rage Monthly, Baltimore Out Loud, Instinct, NEXT Magazine, OutSmart Magazine, OutFront Colorado, Camp Magazine, Out Impact Magazine, Horizon Barcelona Magazine, The Advocate magazine and on such national radio coverage on shows such as This Show Is So Gay and Question Reality. He also has two music videos in rotation on the LOGO network, his first of which was debuted on a major show by Jennifer Hudson and has toured and performed in many substantial and important LGBT festivals and music clubs (a complete list can be found on his website). This artist has created an impact on people like myself as well as other fans of LGBT dance music. Many articles are listed on his page with links to verify their validity as well as his music video link on a major television network. When googled his website appears at second on my page and only beaten by facebook. If this artist, with his multiples of press coverage, tours, and his current rotation on major music network and various dance music radio programs, should be deleted then I would say other artist such as Semi Precious Weapons and Tony Enos as well as many others should be deleted. All of these artist have proven themselves in their own rights and have received much considertion and press coverage especially in the LGBT community. If we are saying the press coverage from the LGBT community doesn't count as viable or important press coverage then I would say delete all articles, but as I see it now, this article and artist meet the standards of notablity.

• Comment. I rewrote Tony Enos last night to remove all the 'hype' and stick to the facts, again, none of which can be verified due to the lack of independent evidence. I personally would delete that article as not meeting WPMusic.
• I feel that you are get confused about quality and quantity. There may well be 'multiples of press coverage' - but they are all derived from self promo interviews conducted by the artist. I can't find anything that isn't - certainly no reviews which don't derive from the artist himself. (If you read WPMusic, you get a good idea of what is and isn't considered good sources of information.)This leads me to question the popularity of the artist - if he was a popular as you say, I would expect a lot more press coverage which doesn't rely on the same old self promo interviews - which to be honest are not at the forefront of independent music - whether from the gay or straight scenes. His current rotation may break him - and in time he may warrant an entry under WP Music but at this time, sorry he doesn't. RichardLowther (talk) 17:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article reads like a self promo, referencing in the main only interviews given by the artist in which he promotes himself in a postitive light or from his own facebook etc pages. The article is full of weasel words - relying on details which have note been or can not be independently verified. If he has a fan base, it appears to be small and I am not convinced that all the edits are not being made by the same one or two people - they are never signed in or under a name. RichardLowther (talk) 18:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree with RichardLowther, one of my initial concerns was that this article has only been edited by very persistent anons (anons rarely check so regularly on a page to remove any negative tags) and that the creator has edited several pages, but only to add information on this one person. Although it may not be a conflict of interests, it looks like self-promotion. Boleyn2 (talk) 19:37, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I can assure everyone that the article is not self promotion and that I do edit the article under annons because I don't always feel like signing in, sometimes forgetting to. I was unsure how to properly write an article on Wikipedia and did try to do it like a book report based on a few articles that I have read and that were online, the artist facebook updates, and website updates. I can and will rewrite the article to comply more with the an informative article and not like an interview, if that would help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk • contribs) 06:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you, and I wouldn't expect someone who is new to understand all the rules - we're all still learning, however long we've been on here - and we're pleased to see people creating articles! However, we need to be really clear who is editing in situations where tags are being removed in particular. Are you the anon who fist voted 'don't delete' on here? If so, please merge your comments so there is only one heading of 'don't delete' and it is clear that they are all the comments of one person. Best wishes, Boleyn2 (talk) 07:11, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I had the first comment on here but I am not sure how to merge them. I am in the process of rewriting the article now and should have it done sometime this weekend (if all goes well). If you do have any tips of any kind that would be greatly appreciated. Should I inform the creator of the Tony Enos article of the same, I sort of try to follow that lead on writing, as he is another artist that is known by the LGBT community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk • contribs) 07:20, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've merged your comments now so they're clearly from the same person. Asking people who've created similar articles for advice is a good idea. Best wishes, Boleyn2 (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So can this conversation be considered closed and can I remove the deletion notice off of the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk • contribs) 11:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just to clarify, my vote is definitely for deletion as he doesn't seem to meet notability criteria. If you work on it and can prove me wrong, then try to do so. You might also want to move the content to User:YouCalledMeBeautiful/sandbox where you could work on it, and if the article's deleted but he becomes more notable later on, you could recreate the article. Boleyn2 (talk) 13:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 13:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails every criterion of WP:MUSIC. Yilloslime ^T_C 16:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Even with a substantial rewrite, I still can't see it meeting the criteria set in WP Music, there is a complete lack of any independent comment about him - everything derives from his self promotional interviews which have been picked up by fringe magazines - none of which seem to question or independently verify any of stories. I think that Boleyn2's comments about reworking in a sandbox for the future and repost should he meet WPmusic in the future is good advice. RichardLowther (talk) 17:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete i cannot find any third party, reliable sources to attest to his notability. Theserialcomma (talk) 18:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are many links to third party sources listed in the article. If you would like to delete the article then go ahead and do so. I thought I explained and proved how this artist met the criteria for an article. If it is that serious then go ahead and delete the article. I will continue to build my knowledge of this website, writing articles, and I hope everyone will at least look up the artist as he is a good artist and has an impact in the LGBT dance music community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.48.109 (talk) 06:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just checking, is that last anon comment by you, YouCalledMeBeautiful? If so, I'm very pleased that you plan to continue writing article no matter the result on this one article. Boleyn2 (talk) 06:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes it is, sorry I have to get used to logging in. I do plan to continue writing articles about things that I care about and that I find significant, that are not on Wikipedia. I understand this website has rules and regulations, which I did think I followed with this article. I don't think there is a big enough LGBT community presence on this website and artist that are legitimately involved in doing something for the LGBT community should be recognized for their contributions. I also do not understand why this article is being criticized so much when other articles are clearly for self promotion and show no reference, links, or support the claims made in the articles, while the article I wrote has all of those things. I became a fan of this artist over the summer when I saw his show and then looked up his music, read his articles, watched his videos, and video blogs and I think he is a legitimate person to write about based on his press coverage, video rotation on a major network, and he is signed to a major label distributed indie. If this article is really that offensive to everyone please let me know how to add it to my sandbox because I don't want this article to be permanently gone and will wait until I get the "OKAY" for the Wikipedia editors to relist the article because standard society says it's okay. How one article is picked over another for this is beyond my comprehension. I need someone to explain to me how articles like Tony Enos are not deleted since he has no supporting articles, label, or rotation or charting, an he is not the only one. I don't understand this at all and need someone to explain this to me please.YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:22, 16 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, we know: WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, but doesn't let this article off the hook. Tony Enos should probably also be deleted, and if and when it is nominated for WP:AfD I'll most likely !vote for deletion.Yilloslime ^T_C 07:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak KEEP    I think that all this article needs to make it “retainable” is more independent, third-party, verifiable references/citations about Daniel Gray. As it stands now, there is are only one two reference(s) that is are about the artist, inasmuch as it is they are review(s) and not interview(s). Perhaps YouCalledMeBeautiful could do more Googling and see what s/he could come up with? For instance, this reference in the wikiarticle, actually has an entire article on Mr. Gray distinct from the interview that follows: this may be useful in further developing and improving the wikiarticle. (The other reference already in the wikiarticle that is not an interview is this one.) But be careful, there are other musicians named Daniel Gray out there (example).

In the meantime, YouCalledMeBeautiful, you ought to userfy the article, or ask to have it done for you, so that if it does end up being deleted, you can work on it in your own user namespace, improving it as per the comments made here in this AfD. If you want the article userfied, and do not know how to do it yourself, leave me a note on my talk page, and I’ll do it for you. — SpikeToronto 20:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment SpikeToronto if you could please let help me in anyway that would be greatly appreciated. As I said I am new to Wikipedia.YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Question I was wondering if Invictus (Daniel Gray album) should also be considered for deletion? Boleyn2 (talk) 11:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments. I don't yet have a view as to notability. Two points, however, in reaction to the above. Weasel words, self promotion, and/or COI are not reasons to bring an article to AfD. Or to delete it. They are reasons to clean it up. Second, wp:othercrapexists is innapplicable when what is point to is not the only reason given to support keeping an article. In such circumstances, that other crap can form part of a cogent, acceptable argument.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • COMMENT  I agree with Epeefleche. To be honest, I could not understand why this discussion had veered at all from notability. The cleanup tags at WP:TMC exist to encourage editors to correct most of the deficiencies that have been highlighted in this article. The fact that the article needed to be more encyclopedic and less “fluffy,” less of a puff piece, would suggest that the article be appropriately tagged for improvement, not deleted. — SpikeToronto 21:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • Comment. I disagree with Epeefleche. No matter how you clean up this article, it still fails to meet the basic criteria of WPMusic or notability. If you start to allow well written articles about anyone, then you are on the slippy slope. I still see that the supporters of keeping this article, still haven't produced any independent evidence/detail to support the keeping of this article. Merry Christmas to all. RichardLowther (talk) 11:41, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• In addition, I've just stripped out most if not all of the fluff.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I have to say that I still find that there's a lack of independent reliable sources sufficient to establish notability. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep-I have to say that this is an artist that I really like and I learned of him when I saw his video on LOGO. I say keep it! He wrote about this on his website and I have read his articles and reviews on more than one occasion in credible and reliable publications.HilaryDuffFan1 (talk)

Comment is the new user above the creator? I'm a bit confused that someone's first edit on WP is on an AfD, and one where it's been difficult to keep track of people editing under different names/IPs, but perhaps this has made me unnecessarily cynical... Boleyn2 (talk) 23:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment no I am the creator and I don't know who the above person is. I have already admitted and posted during this discussion, that I do sometimes forget to log in so it's not like I'm being deceitful and would turn around and create a new login. I don't understand why it's hard for you to believe that people like this artist. The artist also did write a response on his blog to this discussion so that might have prompted someone to write in this talk box. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk • contribs) 07:37, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Coffee // have a cup // ark // 09:18, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(NOT A NEW 'KEEP' - FROM CREATOR WHO HAS ALREADY WRITTEN ABOVE) Keep everyone should know my vote and that is to keep the now cleaned up article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk • contribs) 16:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC) — YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Delete. Fails notability as a musician and as an actor/entertainer. Being popular in a niche publications doesn't equal notability to me. If people removed his sexual preference from the equation, this wouldn't even be disputed, which makes me question how many are !voting to keep based on that and not his actual notability. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: One would think if this gent was as famous as his partisans here maintain, and there had been as many articles about him as all of that, some would have shown up on Google News. As it happens, a G-News search for "Daniel Gray" + Invictus turns up zero hits, either on recent or on the archive search. Of the references in the article that actually pertain to him, all are specialty LGBT blogs (only one, Horizon, even appears to be printed, and does not itself appear to be a notable publication by WP:RS standards). A single album even were it a major studio release would fail WP:MUSIC. Fails WP:BIO. A powerful lot of SPAing here as well ...  Ravenswing  07:56, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I've just filed on the album.  Ravenswing  01:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't see why this article is going up for deletion. I got an email from a friend of mine telling me about this article being up for deletion and was asked to help vote to keep it. There have been legitimate articles written about this artist and he has notoriety.

• www.outimpact.com/entertainment/music-entertainment/album-reviews/daniel-gray-invokes-invictus-2914
• www.horizonbarcelona.com (October 2009 Issue)
• http://www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=36767
• www.thisshowissogay.com/?q=node/9
• http://baltimoreoutloud.com (August 2009 Issue)
• www.nextmagazine.com (September 2009 Issue)
• http://www.logoonline.com/video/daniel-gray/444862/lost-found.jhtml?id=1623600

There are artist with far less on on here.PopMusicLover03 (talk)— PopMusicLover03 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Don't Delete I vote to keep the article. I don't know what people are being so uptight for. Keep it!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by RainbowLover2009 (talk • contribs) 05:00, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I hate to remain paranoid, but both the above have made no other edits on WP apart from here. In fact, only Spike Toronto has expressed the opinion that this should be kept and has ever edited other than about this man. I'm concerned that those who got this e-mail from a friend may not have looked up the inclusion guidelines at all, but I'm more worried that they are not separate people. Boleyn2 (talk) 10:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Commnet I share Boleyn2's concerns. I will repeat my comments that some posters - ie PopMusicLover03 don't understand the difference between self promotional articles appearing in very niche magazines to independently written non biased articles written in notable press. None of the 'to keep' posters have yet provided anything to suggest that WPMUSIC is met, and at the end of the day that is the only criteria against which we are measuring. RichardLowther (talk) 11:16, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment think what you want, but I am my own person. I sent an email out to 5 people and that email asks them to send it to 5 people, to help save this article. Think what you want.PopMusicLover03 (talk)

• Reply: What I think, and what is in fact Wikipedia's policy, is that e-mailing people to "save" an article is a violation which can if unchecked lead to account blocking. I'll reiterate the template at the top of this discussion: this is not a vote. This is a discussion that weighs whether the article meets Wikipedia policy and guidelines, and the only valid arguments are those which address them. Please take a look at WP:CANVASS and please stop any e-mail campaign at once.  Ravenswing  14:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I have not create other profiles and nor will I ever create other profiles. I do apologize if I broke any rules, as I said before, I am new to Wikipedia and am only trying to save my article because I worked very hard on it. If there is a place I can put the article for now until later please let me know. But I think that the many of other votes prove that this artist is viable with articles being written about him in various publications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YouCalledMeBeautiful (talk • contribs) 15:43, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Yo dude think what you want and say what you want. I think that this debate was started by someone with a bias and discrimination against the LGBT community. For users to say that "the articles listed don't count because they are in specialty based magazines is unfair. So only articles written about artist in heterosexual geared blanket magazines count as a legitimate article about a person? There is something wrong here, and reading back this whole thing seems to have started because of one person's grudge. Do what you want and say what you will, but it's an article and I am 100% sure that this is a campaign in and of it self to erase LGBT known artist and people off of Wikipedia and it's a crying shame. Be conservative if you like, that's fine, but for a bias, and feud to start something like this is a shame and I frown upon all of it. I will stop sending the emails and I will inform the people I sent them to, to please not send it out so I can follow the rules, but I think the campaign against this must stop as well. I'm a fighter and just because I didn't write this article doesn't mean I won't fight against the injustice being done. To me this is greater then an article written by a friend, based on the comments I've read, the article seems to be a target and that IS NOT FAIR!!!PopMusicLover03 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:54, 26 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

• Reply: You want to fight to save the article? Great. Go take a look at the criteria of WP:MUSICBIO and demonstrate to us which ones he meets. Has he been the the subject of multiple newspaper articles or TV movies? Has he had a release that's made a national chart or gone gold? Has he had a major international concert tour? Has he had two or more albums released on a major label? Has he been a member of two or more notable bands or been the most notable regional proponent of a particular musical style? Has he ever been a Grammy nominee? Are any of his tunes in national rotation on a major radio network? That would be, as far as I can see, no, no, no, no, no, no and no. That is the bar Mr. Gray must meet for there to be an article about him on Wikipedia. He does not meet it.  Ravenswing  22:48, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• CommentYes many articles have been published about him in various independent publications by legitimate reporters, all of which I have already listed above, but I can do it again if you like. Unless you are saying that because these publications just so happen to be geared toward the LGBT Community there for they don't count. In reading the history this article was criticized for being poorly written, which has been rectified, and now about publication and notoriety which has been proven time and time again. Here is that list again in case you didn't see it before.

• www.outimpact.com/entertainment/music-entertainment/album-reviews/daniel-gray-invokes-invictus-2914
• www.horizonbarcelona.com (October 2009 Issue)
• http://www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=36767
• www.thisshowissogay.com/?q=node/9
• http://baltimoreoutloud.com (August 2009 Issue)
• www.nextmagazine.com (September 2009 Issue)
• http://www.logoonline.com/video/daniel-gray/444862/lost-found.jhtml?id=1623600
• http://www.starfleetmusic.com/record_pool/new-music-reviews/daniel-gray-lose-a-found-extended.html
• http://www.starfleetmusic.com/record_pool/dance-charts/top-50-dance-chart-101-1507.html (Charting)

PopMusicLover03 (talk) Comment As I started this discussion, I take the comments above as aimed at me and that I have therefore been accused of being someone with a bias and discrimination against the LGBT community. This kind of unfounded allegation has no place on WP and is ridiculously petty. We are discussing whether this meets WP:MUSIC - to resort to accusations that this seems to have started because of one person's grudge makes no sense. Boleyn2 (talk) 17:28, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I don't mean to offend but based on what I've been reading that is how I feel. In a discussion I figured I can say how I felt regarding the article and decisions people are making regarding it, unless there is a rule saying I can't about that. Let me know if that's the case.PopMusicLover03 (talk)

Comment Making completely unfounded accusations that someone has a bias and discrimination against the LGBT community would come under Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Boleyn2 (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I did not personally attack anyone and didn't single out anyone in my comments. I simply am stating my opinion about how the nature of many comments are being perceived by me. PopMusicLover03 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Comment Hello everyone, I am the artist this article is about and I have received many emails about this debate. I would first like to thank my fans for all their love and support. I am also very flattered to see that someone took the time to make this page about me. However I do ask that all the rules of Wikipedia be followed and that while I think it's great for people to debate I don't feel it is necessary to resort to name calling, mud slinging, and talking down to people. I make music to make people happy and I ask for people to understand there is a time and place for everything. If this is not my time to be on Wikipedia then that is fine by me because I will continue to make the music and projects I love. Let's end this year off great with peace, love and dancing. I respect everyone's opinions and thank all my fans and non fans for taking part. Happy Holidays and Happy New Year to all! Much love all around! DanielGrayWorld (talk) 8:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

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.