Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loefah

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. Seems like notability is established here, although the article needs some cleaning. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:25, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Loefah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

spammy tone, dubious notability Jimfbleak (talk) 06:29, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Loefah's notability:Here is some evidence of Loefah's notability. ^[1]

^{[2] [3] [4] [5] [6]} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalexlb (talk • contribs) 14:25, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning keep, based on sources in the article and Factmag bothering with an interview - the article is crappy, but he appears to have historical importance to the genre - David Gerard (talk) 19:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also there is a guardian article and a journal I have now added into the sources. ^[7] Jalexlb (talk) 20:59, 29 August 2016 (UTC) ^[8][reply]

• Keep sufficient notability and sources. --Fixuture (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2016 (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.