Lilsonic (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Cloudcartel (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

Both voted keep on an AfD; with no clear reasons why it should be kept. Lilsonic was created in 2006 but has only recently been actively editing the Tune Day page. This thread by Lilsonic (who is not even the article creator) on my talk page came moments after I tagged the article for afd. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 14:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Thank you User:GeneralizationsAreBad but to be honest, I have no idea what is going on. After I've provided evidence on my end that this article isn't a hoax, and made referenced sources clear, it seems like User:Oluwa2Chainz just doesn't want this page up. He/she is adamant "there are no clear reasons why it should be kept," so I did some digging myself and it seems like he/she has been reprimanded by other users like User:Auntof6([1]), User:Macdonald-ross([2]) and User:Mhotchkiss1108([3]) for making the wrong/hasty decisions with users and articles([4]) but expecting more privileges in the same right([5]<). Something is off. This is not a bad post at all. I've never experienced such responses on Wikipedia before. The community is usually way better in dealing with articles that need a little fixing rather than flat out accusations of being hoaxes. Check the references User:Oluwa2Chainz for the last time. They've been in the article from the very start, but you've ignored them and I can't fathom why. Cloudcartel (talk) 16:20, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This case is being reviewed by GeneralizationsAreBad as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

•  Clerk endorsed - Please compare these two accounts. Note how they speak in the plural: [6][7]. Due to the age of the master, I suspect there may also be sleepers. Thanks, GAB^gab 15:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  In progress - Katie^talk 18:02, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Confirmed, no sleepers. Blocked, awaiting tags. Katie^talk 18:11, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Done KrakatoaKatie, master and socks tagged. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Thanks, closing. GAB^gab 19:42, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]