Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhad Bhabie

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 keep per WP:SNOW. The community has indisputably come to the conclusion that the subject notable on her own merit. Otherwise, cash me ousside how bout dah? ℯ xplicit 06:11, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bhad Bhabie

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is a case of WP:TOOSOON & fails WP:GNG She isn't discussed extensively in any reliable media, at best she is mentioned but never discussed with in-depth. Celestina007 (talk) 17:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Significant coverage [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] (passes general notability) and has a song charted in the United States and Canada (passes subject-specific notability). — Za wl 17:24, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that people are uncomfortable with Bhad Bhabie's lifestyle and behavior but I hope rationality will prevail and not let their emotions affect their judgement on her notability. — Za wl 17:33, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

keep - notable per WP:MUSICBIO #2. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:38, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:54, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep her single entered the Hot 100 chart. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 01:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:16, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:16, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - With my experience writing articles on historic and obscure (but notable) music figures, the fact Danielle, a person with absolutely no musical talent whatsoever, is a "singer" makes me lose faith in the modern music industry. Now that my personal opinion is out of the way, here is my take on policy and notability: she did record a song which entered the Billboard Hot 100 and is signed to Atlantic Records, a major record label. She passes WP:NMUSIC. The fact the article creator waited until this recent breakthrough, instead of hastily pushing an article about an instagram "celebrity" months ago, discredits the assertion this is WP:TOOSOON.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 03:24, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your opinion, genius, but she isn't even a ""singer"" as you put. Glad to know we get to have such knowledgeable and impartial people keeping Wikipedia up to date. Nikki Lee 1999 (talk) 16:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a month ago I would have said delete but it seems she just keeps getting more famous. CloudKade11 (talk) 05:45, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Her single debuted on the Billboard Hot 100 and she is getting a lot of press, therefore notable following the guidelines for a musicians page. WolvesS (talk) 15:35, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject now meets general notability guidelines; in the past 48 hours, her debut music video reached over 20 million views on YouTube, entered the Billboard Hot 100, earning her a deal with Atlantic Records. I think the article name should be Danielle Bregoloi, and not her stage name. ElCheche (talk) 18:41, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Keep as per above; the subject clearly meets WP:MUSICBIO #2. Power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:32, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've never heard of this person until today, but it seems clear that she qualifies for notability according to WP:MUSICBIO. We have plenty of articles on musicians with less claim to notability. It's also not a case of BLP1E, since I'm seeing at least two newsmaking events here, even if the coverage isn't that in-depth. Robofish (talk) 23:20, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Rename to Danielle Bregoli: She is now notable under WP:MUSICBIO for infamous reasons, but she charted. Also, she is known as Danielle Bregoli in most media, and name should be under WP:NCP guidelines. Tibbydibby (talk) 03:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Heepman1997 (talk) 05:08, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename Significant coverage on her already, and the other reasons above. Abequinn14 (talk) 16:14, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As others have said, a charting song along with pages worth of articles. Nikki Lee 1999 (talk) 16:36, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I share the nominator's probable desire to delete the subject of the article (I'm NOT being literal), but from a policy standpoint, she has had plenty of coverage at this point to keep under WP:N and WP:V. I agree with renaming the article to her real name. PCHS-NJROTC ^{(Messages)Have a blessed day.} 19:46, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Single made the Hot 100 chart. Bythebooklibrary (talk) 00:52, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Now signed to Atlantic, a major. Also a notable meme. What we really should be discussing is whether or not to move the article to "Danielle Bregoli" or not. --Aleccat 01:35, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep. Renaming can be discussed at its proper venue: the talk page with an RM tag at the top of the section. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The subject is notable as in addition to the significant coverage of the catch phrase, she has a charted song and is signed to a major label. --DoubleuWW (talk) 04:26, 19 September 2017 (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.