This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music of the United Kingdom, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Music of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Music of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Music of the United KingdomMusic of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because it may be a bit barebones, but it's hardly advertising/promotion, and she won a Young Musician Award hosted by the BBC. @Danielcohens: what makes ye think it's advertising? --CiphriusKane (talk) 09:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just cause somebody wins a random award by a notable media outlet does not necessarily make them a contender for their own Wikipedia page. The idea of Wikipedia pages is for notable people and their historical value. Forget the karaoke singing of someone else's songs to win awards, I question where she fits into history? I mean did she write some popular music of her own like Bob Dylan? Is her own music in the top 100 billboard charts? Danielcohens (talk) 09:54, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I don't mean to be disrespectful, especially since your the one who created the page. I'm just wondering what global significance Hannah has. I mean we have regular news media to cover artists. Wikipedia is primarily for artists who have either performed on the global scale (sold out stadiums) or written material that is considered significant to the industry.
As for promotional/advertising, I'll answer. The references lists her website which is self-promoting. The references also include reviews/interviews which is primarily self-promotion. Danielcohens (talk) 10:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While she does have a beautiful voice and sounds like a great singer, let's face it - even her Youtube channel has an average of 2k views per video. Hardly a person of historical significance warranting a Wikipedia page. Think of it this way. If you go to Google News, you'll find tons of people that are regularly appearing in the news, yet their notoriety doesn't warrant a Wikipage of their own. If that were the case, every online influencer, singer, artist, etc., with some awards or press would be on Wiki is my point. Danielcohens (talk) 10:12, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Her website is listed as an external link which is permitted per WP:EL, nae as a reference, and interviews cannot be used to establish notability by itself, but does not exclude them as references and does not make it self-promotion. This genuinely feels like ye're just reaching for an excuse to have the page deleted CiphriusKane (talk) 10:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are hundreds of millions of musicians globally that have won talent competitions or are have been mentioned in the press. Does that warrant a wikipedia page for each artist?
You still have not explained what historical value there is in creating a page for her.
I mean she's not on any billboard charts, never wrote a song for a famous artist, never sold out global stadiums, or contributed anything of value to the music industry that is cited in the references. So what exactly is she famous for? Just winning an award by the BBC and being interviewed a couple times?
Again, Wikipedia is not a music news tabloid, rather designed for those people, places and things that have historical significance. Anything that doesn't meet the historical significance "barrier of entry" is otherwise considered self advertisement to promote their careers. But even if its not self-promotion and you don't work for Hannah to create the page, I still fail to see why she warrants her own Wikipedia page. Danielcohens (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is for subjects that are considered notable. I believed she was notable for winning the contest. And naw, the only relation I have to Ms Rarity is we both happen to be Scottish. This is a misuse of the speedy deletion system, and I think ye're looking for WP:AFDCiphriusKane (talk) 10:35, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In 2021, the BBC gave the same award to Sasha Canter. There is no Wikipedia page for that person. No disrespect to the Scottish cause you guys make great drinking partners. But to the point, I just don't think its appropriate that anybody who wins a LA Times, NY Post, CNN, or BBC award (or positive review, article, etc) should receive their own Wikipedia page. I mean if the NY Times gives an award to a restaurant, does that warrant their own Wikipedia page? What historical value does that have? Isn't it enough that they were mentioned in mainstream press? I think that Wikipedia is for very notable people who have historical value based on their contribution or notoriety.
An example, just cause a guy gets beat up by police doesn't mean he deserves a Wikipedia page of his own. Obviously in the case of Rodney King or George Floyd where there is historical significance to the case, it does deserve. My point is nothing she has done with her career warrants a Wikipedia page. I mean she won an award and averages 1k views on Youtube for every song she releases on her official channel. Danielcohens (talk) 10:57, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
