Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacy Gunn
: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 per WP:SNOW. CSD#A7 and CSD#G11 also apply. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
=[[Stacy Gunn]]=
:{{la|Stacy Gunn}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|Stacy Gunn}})
Promotional and I can't see a clear claim to notability through all the puffery and trivia. Maybe I am missing something given how badly it is written. There was also copyvio material, lifted from the subject's own webisite, which I have removed. (See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stacy_Gunn&oldid=676546149 this version] if you want to see the additional claims made in that content.) That makes it clear that the artist is releasing records on their own label, so no record deal then. It is also an almost unreferenced BLP. The only reference offered was a spammy link to the subject's own website and the search links above fail to reveal a smoking Gunn (Sorry!). Nothing much but social media.
Note: I had put this on as a PROD rationale but then I saw that PROD had already been contested twice so I am switching this to an AfD. DanielRigal (talk) 18:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 18:37, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
:Speedy delete per A7, G11. Compassionate727 (talk) 18:47, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
:Speedy delete and salt per above. And now we have an IP who persists in removing AFD and all maintenance templates. 2601:188:0:ABE6:5D65:637D:D70A:E45F (talk) 19:14, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
:Speedy Delete - minimal sources found for a musician of that name, mostly primary. Does not meet notability guidelines for entertainers, and the article doesn't even try to do so. Promotional and unencyclopedic content Scr★pIronIV 19:21, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
{{clear}}
: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.