Deletion review archives: 2010 August

6 August 2010

  • Yaki Kadafi – Deletion endorsed. The usual advice—creating a userspace draft with cited reliable sources—applies in this case. – IronGargoyle (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it.
Yaki Kadafi (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

WP:NOTE Illuminati hater (talk) 06:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According the talk page it was originally deleted for not being notable enough. However, there is plenty evidence to the contrary.

1. News reports about his death: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Yh8zvlQoRc

2. He was the sole witness to the murder of tupac. http://ca.eonline.com/uberblog/b33767_witness_tupacs_murder_killed.html

3. Solo post-humorous content is still being released and sold on amazon. http://www.amazon.com/Son-Rize-1-Kadafi/dp/B000KD0BE2

4. Even though he died at the young age of 19 he has appeared in the following songs/albums (most of which went goid or better): http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/7068994

5. Online biographies of him litter the net from reputable sources. A quick google search found the following: http://www.last.fm/music/Yaki+Kadafi, http://www.thugz-network.com/Outlawz~Kadafi.php, http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1435452/bio

6. The french version of wikipedia contains an article on Yaki Kadafi:

http://translate.google.ca/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaki_Kadafi&ei=OpJMTI2ZJ4L6sAOuj-xI&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=17&ved=0CGAQ7gEwEA&prev=/search%3Fq%3DYaki%2BKadafi%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DM0m%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26prmd%3Div (translated to english)

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaki_Kadafi (original)

7. The deletion discussion doesn't indicate a high-level knowledge of Kadafi or hip-hop in general. An impartial review by individuals who are more knowledgeable of hip-hop is required.

As a final note, I would be open to creating a new article should the old one not meet certain standards. However, I do not wish to create a new one only to have it deleted (as the last couple attempts from various members) using the flawed original judgment as a basis.

Also the original deleter indicated he would unavailable to answer questions via his talk page which is another reason I requested the review.

  • The article was deleted a year and a half ago and is not locked; my usual suggestion in this case is that you recreate the page overcoming the reasons for deletion. Do make sure that you include citations to reliable sources; the above items do not appear to be reliable. Stifle (talk) 08:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Stifle. but I;d suggest doing so on a user subpage--there were 3 G4 speedys for attempted re-creations and if put back directly in mainspace, there might well be another. DGG ( talk ) 01:40, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.