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 -- Y not? 04:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

White Dawg[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

This bio has survived 4 nominations based what I consider faulty reasoning. Allmusic shows the song charted solely on the Rap Singles chart. This is a sub chart, not the Billboard 200. That chart only ranks against others within that particular genre. It would not be the "nation chart" that WP:MUSICBIO refers to. I see this as an end-run around that fact that it never cracked the top 200. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Charting on a genre-specific chart still meets WP:MUSIC; it is indicative of significant success consistent with encyclopedicity. The longstanding consensus is that the Billboard hip-hop charts "count" as charts. Chubbles (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a long-standing consensus? Would you please link me to the guideline that shows me that charting within a specific genre only counts as "nationally charting"? Thanks. Niteshift36 (talk) 06:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we look at WP:MUSTARD we see: "Billboard component charts should not be used in the tables, unless the song fails to enter the main chart, but appears on an airplay or sales chart." He didn't make it on Billboards airplay or sales charts that I can find. So it shouldn't be used in a table. If it's not appropriate for use in a table, how can it be appropriate for establishing notability? Niteshift36 (talk) 07:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 07:58, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is a different type of chart. For instance, the Billboard Pop 100 chart had three component charts, the Pop 100 Airplay, Hot 100 Singles Sales, and Hot Digital Songs charts. These three "feeder" charts measured different aspects of things and were weighted in specific ways to generate the Pop 100. The Hot Rap Singles chart is not a component chart. And even if it were a component chart, if that's the only placement it had, it would be appropriate for display. This is really a technicality about chart display on discography pages - that's why it's given in that guideline, not for notability inquiries. Genre-specific charts are key indicators for notability of artists that are not mainstream pop acts (who make up the vast majority of the Hot 100) or who do not have strong album sales (the Billboard 200). They are still measuring national success, but for a particular oeuvre. Chubbles (talk) 12:44, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. With a charted single (albeit one of the many unconvincing Billboard charts), and at least some significant coverage (Allmusic ([1]) plus pay-per-view articles from the South Florida Sun-Sentinel ([2])) there's enough for a short article.--Michig (talk) 14:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Genre charts are appropriate for establishing notability. WP:CHART even includes a couple - U.S. Billboard Hot Dance Club Songs and U.S. Billboard Hot R&B/Hip Hop Songs - in its examples of how to record chart positions in articles. Rlendog (talk) 02:31, 6 September 2009 (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.