Blastoyz : BoyTheKingCanDance ( talk ) 07:54, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Israel .  DreamRimmer ( talk ) 07:59, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG , couldn't find any reliable sources online.  JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 08:26, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] When it comes to music- many of the most reliable sources are in fact various websites and E-magazines, and if you choose to overlook them, then You may claim the same, (couldn't find any reliable sources online) as for all the other DJs out there, who do have a Wikipedia article and who are as significant as Blastoyz or less. .  Please lift the deletion discussion from this article many thanks Adi Ady111 ( talk ) 12:02, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:09, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello you say it is clear that this person does not meet the criteria per WP:GNG.  I would like to challenge that position: The way I see it Blastoyz meets 3 different types of criteria if you will, as per the definition of the WP:GNG:  1. significant coverage in reliable sources- the man has been voted twice in a row as one of the top 100 DJs in the world.  this was published on the official DJ MAG website.  the web is full of praises of his work.  he is unseparated part of each end every major festival on the globe,  plus the number of his followers amount to some 1.75 million (Facebook, Instagram and YouTube combined).  seems legit to me.  2. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country. - so Blastoyz received Platinum on his song "Mandala" for over 100 million views and streams.  I will add the citation fir this event as well (it is a video from his personal TikTok channel, but nevertheless it is an evidence)  3. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city;- he is definitely one of the top artists in the world when it comes to Psy trance music.  I don't see why this can be undermined.  I ask that you please remove the deletion consideration box, while I add all the necessary citations.  many thanks Adi Ady111 ( talk ) 11:31, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] oh and I forgot to add here that his song "after dark" was featured in the Netflix series called "insatiable" (season 2, Episode 1)- so he meets a 4th section of WP:GNG.  "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, such as a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film"  I have added a citation for that one well.  LMK if there is a more reliable source.  Please reconsider the deletion of this article.  I believe I have established reasonable notability for the man :) thanks Adi Ady111 ( talk ) 11:51, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I am also reminding you that a Disagreement over a policy or guideline is not dealt with by deleting it.  Similarly, issues with an inappropriate user page can often be resolved through discussion with the user.  I expect that you will reconsider your desire to delete this article Ady111 ( talk ) 12:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Do you have a connection to Blastoyz?  LibStar ( talk ) 15:16, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] No connection to Blastoyz except for admiring his music.  Ady111 ( talk ) 17:25, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ady111 ( talk ) 19:17, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  At this point in time, I found no verifiable, independent, sigcov coverage.  gidonb ( talk ) 01:57, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I disagree.  I will start by reminding you the Wikipedia policy, saying hat a Disagreement over a policy or guideline of an article is not dealt with by deleting it.  second- I believe I have established substantial claim for notability, on the following basis: significant coverage in reliable sources- the man has been voted twice in a row as one of the top 100 DJs in the world.  this was published on the official DJ MAG website.  the web is full of praises of his work.  he is unseparated part of each end every major festival on the globe, plus the number of his followers amount to some 1.75 million (Facebook, Instagram and YouTube combined).  seems legit to me.  2. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country. - so Blastoyz received Platinum on his song "Mandala" for over 100 million views and streams.  I will add the citation fir this event as well (it is a video from his personal TikTok channel, but nevertheless it is an evidence)  3. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city;- he is definitely one of the top artists in the world when it comes to Psy trance music.  I don't see why this can be undermined.  I ask that you please remove the deletion consideration box, while I add all the necessary citations.  many thanks  4. a song of his was featured in a netflix series.  you can claim your claim in reference to many other musicians.  where do you draw the line?  Ady111 ( talk ) 08:28, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] also regarding your claim not to meet sigcov: You must bare in mind that this article is about a Trance music artist.  some of the most reliable and published sources would be online magazines.  this would be true to other similar artists such as David Guetta.  have a look at David Guetta's article.  go to the reference section.   you will find the same citation sources I used for Blastoyz: DJ MAG, a web site called "Pop matters" another web site called "we rave you" which was claim to be "not reliable" in Blastoyz's case and I can go on and on.  so again I believe this article meets the sigcov criteria (which in this case is very hard to define), and I urge you to change your mind.  many thanks ADY111 Ady111 ( talk ) 09:25, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] the man has been voted twice in a row as one of the top 100 DJs in the world.  this was published on the official DJ MAG website.  the web is full of praises of his work.  he is unseparated part of each end every major festival on the globe, plus the number of his followers amount to some 1.75 million (Facebook, Instagram and YouTube combined).  seems legit to me These are not criteria for notability , he needs to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:38, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ady111 , comments made are WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS , red herring , and otherwise irrelevant pleading.  I drew my conclusions based on the fact that I could not find notability-supporting sources "out there" by WP:NEXIST and based on the data in the article, and could not otherwise make a case for keep.  If you have quality sources, just insert each URL below and I will definately take a look!  I always check how we can keep an article.  For this article, I reached the opposite conclusion.  gidonb ( talk ) 15:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO , the sources provided are not reliable sources.  Google news mainly comes up with music industry sources.  Need more independent sources like mainstream newspapers.  Please note not to WP:BLUDGEON every delete vote here.  LibStar ( talk ) 01:40, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeah. .  I see where this is going.  I used the same sources as for example David Guetta's article.  so those sources are reliable for David Guetta but not in my article.  My article meets  WP:GNG.  Also- this is not a vote, mind you.  Ady111 ( talk ) 13:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not notable WPPUFFPIECE; sources are not reliable.  116.92.232.6 ( talk ) 03:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I will be charitable by conceding that he does have some media coverage in specialist publications, but I am not convinced that they are sufficiently reliable and many give the impression of reprinting his manager's promotional announcements.  Good luck to him as he builds his online presence, but Wikipedia must not be a part of that effort.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 15:11, 29 May 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete