delane matthews in re my tagging of article diff see also in regard to this article it looked like a normal biographical article about a television actress to me as opposed to being advertising and her four years in the cast of dave's world suggests to me that she is notable talk ok with imdb the only source it looked like spam to me if records and little nobody in re if records hist little nobody hist and coi spas nina phunsta popstarr shareradar dsk see also wikipedia articles for deletion little nobody nd nomination nina phunsta is associated with if records so there is a clear conflict of interest a google search for nina phunsta adequately demonstrates the above claim when reading through various posts on forums various forum profiles of nina phunsta contain the if records website in their signature this is in contrast to previous claims that andrez bergen is a former writing colleague on nina phunsta's talk page dsk is harder to pinpoint as it is a relatively newer handle but a google search presents forum posts mostly related to if records as for the little nobody page wayward seafarers review chris downton d world june this review does not exist on the d world website the link is to the homepage of that website there are no other external links under references that can be used to verify any of the text on the wikipedia page some of the articles cited are recent so a link to the article on the web version of the newspapers should be provided the abc artist profile is the only reliable source and is dated from and refers only to a local dance music scene many of the links under external links are broken much of the information appears to be fabricated as it does not appear anywhere else when performing a google search colloquial language in background information website tablittle nobody's dodgy myspace site this indicates that the article is largely a puff piece thus articles related to little nobody and if records should be removed for not meeting notability guidelines and being written in an advertising format large amounts of unverifiable information no admin has denied the speedy yet but although it was tagged or more hours ago neither has anyone deleted it i agree that it's spam and deserves deletion the problem may be that promotional puffery that it is it's been around for so long but that can cut both ways jclemens has since declined db g diff recommending or afd i did a spam cleanup explaining why in my edit summary diff thank you the broken external links should also be dealt with according to wikipedia policy and citations requested for the majority of the information posted that should allow administrators to conclude that the page does not meet notability criteria and is unverifiable i will attempt this soon user waltons