Talk:Won-G
This article was nominated for deletion on 11 April 2018. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
[edit]If the people leaving the messages (the mods) about the citations could possibly tell me or even better, help me quickly fix problems with sources it would be greatly appreciated.
Clarification
[edit]The clarification was removed as I believe that the current sources are sufficient and the article is easily sufficient enough to stay in the system. If you feel otherwise (mods) please tell me why and what I need to fix. Thanks. Skookie5 (talk) 08:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skookie5 (talk • contribs) 03:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Needs a rewrite from better sources
[edit]I took quick look over the article and found little beyond unreliable sources or public relations pieces used as sources. I didn't look closely at the Career section, but it looks to be WP:SOAP as well, though with much better references.
The article needs a complete rewrite from sources that are both reliable and independent of the subject. Special attention should be paid to whatever lasting notability he may have, rather than the in-the-moment hype that drives the music industry. --Ronz (talk) 17:39, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
CSD
[edit]Further to above with user who checked sources, I agree that only PR is available for this person and there's no way this article can be of any significant notability. The current version is one approved by unknown IP once reverted by user drimes. The last trimmed version was this which is even more lacking !! A7 applies because not a single reference indicates importance of this person or notability of this person.
I think the purpose of this article with undisclosed paid editing ToS violation issues is that it may get SEO ranking or promotional/advertisement on wikipedia and therefore the criteria of G11 is even more suitable.
The article should be deleted. --Drewziii (talk) 07:00, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Drewziii: "A7 applies because not a single reference indicates importance of this person or notability of this person." Nope, three Billboard sources are enough. Have a look at WP:A7, User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 and User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes - and, for that, matter WP:NMUSIC #2 : "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart". If you still want to delete an article, file a debate at WP:AfD (though see previous comments). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:42, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- Hello. G11 was also indicated as a reason which still applied but I have nominated it for AFD. Many experienced users have edited this article, none of them were able to find anything notable. --Drewziii (talk) 11:11, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Contested deletion
[edit]This page should not be speedily deleted because... I believe the information is important to the victims of the fraud that this person has done. He needs to be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.74.198 (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2018 (UTC)