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.--Fuhghettaboutit 15:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Triple 777

[edit]

I tend to skim articles. I read the first paragraph from which I gather that the article is about a person - but nothing else. I look for links which might establish notability - I see none. I note the last sentence: "the masses will know about him soon" which suggests not yet notable. Is he notable at present? -- RHaworth 07:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know anything about this page but if you're nominating something for deletion the least you can do is check it properly and research it thoroughly, rather than just 'skim' it. If you can't be bothered to do it properly why should anyone else bother to voice an opinion on it? Nick mallory 08:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless some good sources can be found and rather speedily unlees an article is written that is not jta myspace copy.[1]--Tikiwont 09:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete - Its a completly POV excercise in PR for a middling jazz musician who sometimes plays crowds as big as ten people, totally NN delete it. Elmo 12:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete pending verifiable notability. I spent a few fruitless minutes looking for this guy on any kind of reputable source through Google. --Moonriddengirl 13:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are some claims in the article which might possibly represent notability, but I am not really able to judge their importance. I do note they are neither in the first nor last paragraph. DGG (talk) 00:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with DGG about there being claims, I tried checking one - appearing with the Outlawz on their sophomore release. Unfortunately, our articles on both the group and that album make no mention of this guy. An oversight, perhaps. But here we can invoke WP:BLP's admonition that "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles" - and if one questions whether association with the group or the album is "contentious", try playing it at school or in church and dollars-to-doughnuts you'll find something less than universal cheers ;-) . Carlossuarez46 21:38, 2 August 2007 (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.