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. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LostPoet[edit]

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

This article, on first glance, has a lot of impressive sourcing. However, upon closer examination, none of them are reliable secondary sources with significant coverage. They are all links to social networking sites, Youtube videos, or trivial listings. This article has been speedied twice before, once as Lostpoet, but I think a more complete discussion will get this settled. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 20:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 21:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 21:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 21:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is linked to an already established page (stub) of his father who is a retired NFL Champion. There are numerous articles I have seen that have little to NO citations at all. For example the wiki page for the Amercian band LPG out of Los Angeles has no sources and is requesting citation. {Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2011) } Why hasn't that page been deleted? Millions of people visit YouTube and other social media sites daily. The mainstream news media use Facebook, Twitter & Youtube posts as credible sources in stories/segments. We live in a digital age where some information is only available online. Correction: This article has only been speedied once by user Amatulic on 11 Sept 2012 not twice as stated by Torchiest. The previous spelling of Lostpoet was incorrect and this version correct LostPoet. — 70.0.234.230 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Please see WP:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. The fact that his father is notable does not make him notable as Wikipedia defines it. The fact that there are other articles here that are no better is not a reason to keep this article. And Wikipedia does not consider social media sites to be "reliable sources" because there is no editorial control or fact checking on what is said there; anyone can say anything they like. There are other places to promote the career of this artist (including all those social media sites), but Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia and there have to be criteria for a subject to be included here. The main criterion is significant coverage by independent reliable sources, and that is what LostPoet seems to lack at present. Maybe later, as his career develops and he becomes more widely known. --MelanieN (talk) 15:58, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I could not find any independent coverage at all of this rap artist at Google News archive. It's true that rap artists don't always get as much coverage as other musicians, but at least some external recognition is required for a Wikipedia article, and I could find none. --MelanieN (talk) 15:58, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — per nom, due to an utter lack of reliable sourcing. Going through WP:BEFORE, I haven't found anything better. User-generated and self-published web content do not establish any modicum of notability. And despite the claims generally made in the lead, this subject is far from even approaching WP:NACTOR or WP:CREATIVE. JFHJr (㊟) 19:19, 29 September 2012 (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.