Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Clit

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 Redirect to Blowfly (artist). The creator and subject of the article has agreed to this. Closed by the nominator, WP:NAC. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 03:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Clit

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

This article does not meet WP:V and thus not WP:BLP. It also fails WP:BIO for the same reasons. The sources listed are not reliable sources showing non-trivial coverage but instead a combination of references to other Wikipedia articles and examples of trivial coverage and non-independent sites. So, delete primarily per WP:V and WP:BLP. It also appears that the creator SheighZam (talk · contribs) has a conflict of interest with regard to this article. If someone can think of a reasonable target to redirect to I'm not entirely opposed to that (though I prefer deletion in this case) but it needs to be discussed first due to the name of this article. Having a redirect point to a BLP that subsequently turns up on Google when someone does a search for "miss clit" is a situation we should consider with great care. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 15:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:N (non-notable stage name); the person concerned would fail WP:BIO, WP:CREATIVE; no reliable secondary sources. Most of the article content is about Blowfly (artist); at most could maybe justify a brief mention in the latter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antipastor (talk • contribs) 17:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I was thinking of the category artist when I mentioned WP:CREATIVE, which maybe wouldn't apply here. In any case, the article does not assert notability as a performer/musician. Antipastor (talk) 00:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this poorly written and referenced article on a non-notable performer. I cut a few images from the article--there was enough promotional content in it already. Drmies (talk) 19:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There can be a redirect to Blowfly's Punk Rock Party wikipedia page, however there is no mention of her live performance as Miss Clit on that particular album. As far as notability is concerned, Miss Clit attracts a younger generation of crowds to shows of the inventor of rap music way back in 1965. this is notable in & of itself. Her performance as both a live performer & recording artist had deemed itself worthy by selling out shows. And yes, perhaps it sounds subjective as I am Miss Clit, however I did not write my own wiki; I had an objective fan create it to avoid conflict of interest. The name is sexual in nature, as that is the type of music for which Blowfly is known, and cannot be altered, as that has been the known name of Blowfly's secretary for several decades.

Additionally, as far as WP:Creative, Miss Clit meets the following criteria: **The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.The person's work either (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention. Please advise what else is needed for deletion to be no longer considered, and thank you for taking the time to review.SheighZam (talk) 07:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response As I said, I'm not opposed to a carefully considered redirect. If you merge whatever is needed from this article to the Bowfly article then a redirect is fine but as it stands now it doesn't meet the required standard regarding sourcing. As a consequence of that, it also fails the notability guideline discussed above as well as WP:BLP which is non-negotiable, regardless of whether the article contains negative information or not. You need significant independent coverage by reliable sources. You can't cite Wikipedia in a wikipedia article or use blogs, websites of record labels, reprints of press releases, Youtube etc. I'm just not seeing the required coverage to support an independent article. I'm also not entirely sure that you understand the consequences of having an article here with your pictures in it under the name "Miss Clit". Anyone can edit here and although Wikipedia is not censored (nor do I believe that it ever should be) you should consider if this is really what you want to do. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 07:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Addendum The creator and subject of the BLP has agreed to a redirect or deletion. I'll wait and give her a chance to merge whatever content can and should be merged into the Bowfly article and then redirect it if there are no objections to that solution. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 09:19, 13 October 2009 (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.