Talk:Smoke Dawg

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because the recreation has numerous notable source mentioned now and he has been the subject of numerous articles since creation. If you see the old article on https://deletionpedia.org/en/Smoke_Dawg you can see that the article now has more reliable sources in the article to determine its notability. TwinTurbo (talk) 17:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

In line with WP:RPDA, the Notability status has changed and there has been Improvement of previous writing. TwinTurbo (talk) 17:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

If you read the article he has also had a posthumous album released which shows his notability and it received a review by notable reviewer Exclaim. TwinTurbo (talk) 17:31, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the speedy deletion note as it is not necessary at all now with the improvements on the article by TwinTurbo making it notable and now reliant on more reliable sources. If needed, colleague originally requesting speedy deletion may request AfD for wider discussion. werldwayd (talk) 19:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because it has been substantiated by references from many reliable sources. No need for speedy deletion. Colleagues can take it to AfD if needed werldwayd (talk) 19:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

More than half of the sources here existed at the prior AFD (ie. published before the AFD and subsequent deletion). The rest are the equivalent of "RIP the late gr8 Smoke Dawg". So unless he's suddenly been resurrected, I suspect you should leave the g4 evaluation to an admin. Praxidicae (talk) 19:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

There is no need for speedy deletion at all. This can go to AfD for wider discussion. But to abide by the "three times rule" of reverts and as I have reverted two times already, I will not resort to reverting this time. You want it gone, let it go. What I will do though is to repatriate most of the info into the Halal Gang page where there is actually a subsection on the rapper. Then this page can become a redirect to that page werldwayd (talk) 19:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't think you have an understanding of the deletion criteria. No one tagged it A7. It was tagged g4 after a lengthy discussion where afaict, nothing has changed. Praxidicae (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

And as I've stated above, A lot more has happened since the last deletion of the article back in July 2018. Your comment of him "suddenly been resurrected" is ignorant, a posthumous album of his has now been released (and plenty posthumous features) and also on a short documentary; Remember Me, Toronto also starred with him in it. Yes I used 15 sources from the old article but there are now 47 sources in the article. Comparing the old article to the standard that is now shows that a lot more notable information on the artist is included than with the previous one that was deleted, in line with WP:RPDA. TwinTurbo (talk) 20:12, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

The only thing that has "happened" is that other rappers have offered tributes to their deceased friend, which have been included in the article in the hope of supporting Smoke Dog's notability. I have renamed this section "posthumous tributes" and moved it to the appropriate place in the article. There is nothing new in this article since it's AfD, except a bunch of tributes and some archival footage of Smoke Dog which was included in a documentary (a documentary not specifically about Smoke Dog). Magnolia677 (talk) 20:58, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

No, that is not the only thing that has "happened". Yes, rappers have tributed their deceased associate, but as I said above, the page was deleted in July 2018. If you read the article you would notice a section on a posthumous album which was released on November 2018 by the artist. 4 months after the page was previously deleted. It has been reviewed by a credible source (Exclaim!). He has made vocal appearances on posthumous albums released by the same rappers who tributed him. A short movie was made in respect of his death to highlight the gun violence in Toronto, the archival footage in the film is not random. I have seen the archive of the deleted page and there is clearly more info now and there are more than double the amount of sources than there was before. The reasons for recreation are valid under WP:RPDA. G4 is only eligible if the article is essentially the same as the one sent through AFD, which it isn't. The article is a substantial rewrite and has addressed the reasons for deletion. TwinTurbo (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Enough adminshopping..the article is no way a CSD. Take it to AfD if you are so keen about deleting it. Olisaiuer (talk) 09:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: you reinstated the CSD tag again[1]. Coould you please point me to the guideline where it says only an admin can remove it? Olisaiuer (talk) 16:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Read Primefac's comments on Werldwayd's talk page. The same thing applies to you. You have no ability to see the prior article and thus no way to evaluate it. If you could stop stalking my contribs, that would be appreciated. Praxidicae (talk) 16:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletionpedia has a rescued archive of the old page. TwinTurbo (talk) 13:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• SmokeDawg Drake.png
• SmokeDawg2017.png

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• SmokeDawgLive.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)