Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jada Kingdom

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. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 04:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jada Kingdom

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No significant coverage of subject; no charted releases. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Jalen Folf (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Jamaica. Jalen Folf (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
She meets the 11 and 12 criteria for [[WP:MUSICBIO]] and is currently signed to Republic records Heatrave (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:32, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A musical artist does not need to chart or attain Gold (or higher) certification to pass notability, those are just some of the requirements needed to meet when the subject has passed WP:GNG and preferably WP:SIGCOV. The two sources from NME and THE FADER cited on this articles are in depth, and the individual has been a subject of the news in the past few weeks, see this, this, and this about her beef with Stefflon Don. dxneo (talk) 12:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above, although the article could be re-written to be less promotional. --GnocchiFan (talk) 17:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion of the sourcing would be helpful in ascertaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. also some coverage of her musical work in Billboard [1], not extensive, but just enough. Also this in Teen Vogue, [2]. Other sources in the article are fine... Oaktree b (talk) 16:54, 5 February 2024 (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.