Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicole Simone

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. Daniel (talk) 23:43, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Simone

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Proposed deletion due to it being WP:PROMOTION and Conflict of Interest by the creator of the article.

"Self-promotion. It can be tempting to write about yourself or projects in which you have a strong personal involvement. However, remember that the standards for encyclopedic articles apply to such pages just like any other. This includes the requirement to maintain a neutral point of view, which can be difficult when writing about yourself or about projects close to you. Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical sources, such as your résumé or curriculum vitae, is unacceptable. See Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest." - Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines to cite in deletion debates

"JustACodeMonkey, known to his friends as Greg, joined WikiPedia to help his friend Nicole Simone (aka Late July)." The article's creator states on his own wikipedia page that he has a personal connection to the subject and created his Wikipedia account specifically o help her. This is an obvious conflict of interest. The creation of this article happened because Nicole Simone would like to use it as promotion of her music activities. Her notability as a musician is questionable, if anything there should be only an article about her charity "Redemption Paws" as the charity is notable, however I do not believe Nicole herself meets the bar for being notable for her music. NoSpamming (talk) 23:38, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant comment by JustACodeMonkey (the article creator) can be found here. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:18, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject seems to fail WP:MUSICBIO, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:GNG although I have doubts about the motivations behind this AfD. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:45, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly just having personal insight into this situation I lost a lot of faith in wikipedia as a whole for allowing this obvious self promotion. If wikipedia or it's editors no longer care about the credibility of this site, so be it.

This is indeed a single purpose account, given the many people who have been threatened by Nicole for "libel" simply for presenting a critical view I find it necessary to protect my privacy. I have no conflict of interest other than having met Nicole in person, we are not associated in any way and I have no incentives here other than restoring my faith in Wikipedia. NoSpamming (talk) 02:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: Setting the article aside, of which I would normally support delete, I am not convinced that this nomination is in good faith, especially with the nominator's rambling above. Curbon7 (talk) 02:58, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 02:59, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 02:59, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 02:59, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if I haven't been coherent, it's been exhausting trying to make this point - first having JustACodeMonkey delete the discussion and attack me, and having my credibility attacked for what seems like a pretty black and white issue to me. Does it really matter who I am? We KNOW there is already a conflict of interest that remains with this article. If anyone can just make a page about their friends band then Wikipedia would be terrible.

I stumbled onto this drama after having briefly met Nicole and was troubled the violation of conflict of interest literally stated on the creators page. Seriously I used to have a lot of respect for Wikipedia, this has really damaged it seeing how easily a clear COI was overlooked.

Again, does it matter who I am? We know Greg has a COI and this should be fixed. How can I convince you I have no COI while maintaining my privacy - If this is possible I will happily do so.

The logic of ignoring a well established COI because of a suspected COI is hard for me to understand. I also would like to adress that in pointing out this obvious COI I have felt repeatedly attacked by wikipedia editors and the user it concerns. You must consider that this is extremely discouraging as a new user, and discourages people from reporting other know conflicts of interest should their motives (and by extension their character) be scrutinized so harshly. In my opinion this scrutiny is beside the point when the facts of the COI are so obvious. NoSpamming (talk) 03:59, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: not convinced of the reliability of sources covering artistic efforts. The Redemption Paws efforts were covered by respected publications such as the CBC, Toronto Star and (well, recognized at least) Toronto Sun. But I looked at other references provided, especially what was published on their "About" pages:

Elicit Magazine [1]: "We work to give musicians the opportunity to be heard [...] Maximum exposure is great, quality exposure is better. [...] We’re looking for people who have a dream to succeed, to persevere [...] We want to get your name out there for you. [...] remember Elicit Magazine, someone who did everything in their power to make that dream come true."
Linger Magazine [2]: "directed by an illustrious vision and dedication to strengthening the independent publishing niche"
L.A. Enthusiast [3]: "The LA Enthusiast blog features the latest attractions and new releases from up and comers all over the city."
Note: The article is almost word for word a copy of Linger Magazine’s article.
Essentially Pop [4]: "we will no longer be accepting unpaid PR agency work. [...] As always, we will write about artists who contact us – or who we contact – for free – but we can no longer work free of charge for PR agencies. [...] Contact us for our very reasonable rates."
Jansen’s Jamz [5]: "A daily dose of New Music and Music History and introducing exciting independent music in In The Spotlight."
Canadian Beats [6]: "Now we’re over 40 Canadian music fans [contributing editors] working hard to promote all the musical talent that Canada has to offer"
Digital Journal [7]: "recognized as a pioneer and leader in social news, blending professional content with high-quality user-generated contributions to inform our audience about what’s happening around the world."
Note: identified as a press release
Soundtrack.net - an indiscriminate list of soundtracks
Adrian Ellis Composer [8] - article was only tangentially about Simone

So, I don't believe the sources adequately support notability here. _signed,Willondon (talk) 14:27, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very early career, no social media or streaming coverage combined with analysis above. I think it is WP:TOOSOON. scope_creep^Talk 16:17, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree, an indie artist that hasn't made it big yet. None of her albums/singles have charted, nor have received airplay. I'm currently waiting for Reve that sings "Ctrl-Alt-Delete" to get more coverage so we can create an article about her, she's had airplay in Canada and is barely scraping the bottom of the notability chart. This woman isn't there yet. Oaktree b (talk) 15:06, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment a quick GSearch shows the charity she established seems to be more notable then the individual herself. This almost feels like a sales pages for her musical career which seems to be dead/going nowhere. I'd support a redirect to the Paws charity thing she runs, but it doesn't have an article. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete She is at early career, WP:TOOSOON. Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:52, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a case of WP:TOOSOON. upcoming but mot notable at this point.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:54, 18 December 2021 (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.