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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:07, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Katey Red[edit]

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

Poorly sourced WP:BLP of a musician with no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC -- the only real claim here is that she was one of the first LGBT musicians in a subgenre that's so stuffed to overflowing with LGBT musicians that being a straight musician in that genre would be the more unusual distinction. And beyond that, all that's been stated about her is that she released an album and met the genre's biggest star, the end. And for sourcing, what we have is her Last.fm profile -- not a notability-conferring source -- and a Q&A interview in which she talks about that other star rather than herself, and thus isn't the subject of the source at all. None of this, neither the content nor the sourcing, is enough. Bearcat (talk) 17:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. And what did your WP:BEFORE searches find? --Michig (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing that was both reliable and verified anything that would pass an NMUSIC criterion. You're hereby invited to stop talking to me like I'm an idiot who doesn't know what I'm doing when it comes to assessing notability. Bearcat (talk) 18:12, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that I think you don't know what you're doing, more that you don't care what you're doing. --Michig (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About which you're also wrong; I care too much what I'm doing for my own good sometimes, in fact. I take it very seriously as an article of faith that even if a topic is notable in principle, there's no value in starting an article that's written and sourced this badly — an article about any topic, notable or otherwise, should never exist until somebody's willing to put at least enough work into it to make it worth existing. Boilerplate articles which just say that the topic exists, but leave the actual demonstration of notability for other people to maybe add later, are not preferable to redlinks, and starting over from scratch with a better written and better sourced article is not a burden. Bearcat (talk) 18:35, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hear, hear...reddogsix (talk) 23:25, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 18:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 18:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 18:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Just a quick search of Google found articles from The New York Times ([1]), Vanity Fair ([2]), significant coverage in Matt Miller's Bounce: Rap Music and Local Identity in New Orleans, and further coverage from The Guardian ("The pioneering sissy rapper is Katey Red"), VICE ([3]), Jordan Flaherty's book Floodlines: Community and Resistance from Katrina to the Jena Six: "In fact, the sissy bounce scene that was birthed a decade ago by gay rapper Katey Red with her 1999 album Melpomene Block Party has rejuvenated the bounce form", Neil Strauss's book Everyone Loves You When You're Dead, Harry Thomas's book Sissy!: The Effeminate Paradox in Postwar US Literature and Culture, and the book Voicing Girlhood in Popular Music: Performance, Authority, Authenticity. --Michig (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Rab V (talk) 22:44, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources provided above. Article clearly needs work but AFD is meant for articles that can't be fixed through normal editing. Rab V (talk) 22:55, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - plenty of sources are available to establish notability, this article requires completion, not deletion. Robman94 (talk) 15:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Katey Red is universally regarded as a pioneer and major figure in the bounce genre, as demonstrated in Michig's sources and plenty of others that can be found in the usual searches. (200+ hits at nola.com alone; in 2010 Vanity Fair called her "originator of the form, and reigning queen of the scene"[4].) I note that a prior attempt at a bio was speedy-deleted (A7) in 2011 [5], so here we are 6 years later with no article. So this brand new attempt should be improved, not deleted. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:45, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. Arxiloxos (talk) 21:32, 24 October 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.