Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of honorific titles in popular music (2nd nomination)
The argument that it is well sourced is not a valid one and the fact that it has many citations is deceptive, as it is clear that most of the sources are being misused. This clearly fails "The source cited must unambiguously support the information as it is presented in the article" at . This is not an isolated phenomenon but occurs throughout the article. The title of the article is also highly problematic, it is not clear that these are "honorific titles" and even those that are not misused descriptions are mainly simple "nick names" or merely marketing tools. The two articles that underpin the lead are also dubious. They do not clearly and unambiguously set this out as a phenomenon, but are little more than lightweight news stories, which are being elevated here to act like academic sources or commentary of similar value. The article does not demonstrate that this is a widely accepted or discussed phenomenon and so is really very close to producing a synthesis (). I agree with the proposer that the handful of "titles" that are in regular use should simply be given in their own articles, this article adds nothing valid, and simply encourages pointless listing and misuse of sources
— User:Sabrebd, 08:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BURDEN||WP:SYN (Wikipedia:Verifiability)