This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This article should not be speedy deleted as being about a subject that was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally and for lack of asserted importance, because... ( an artist with similar spelling has flagged Aiden James falsely. Aiden James is an LGBT Musicial Artist of note in the International Gay and Lesbian Publication, The Advocate Magazine [1] along with MetroWeekly Washington, DC[2])
Definitely agreed that the tagger was trying too hard to find some speedy criterion to squeeze this into — obviously, a person can't have invented himself in the sense that's necessary to fit the criterion it was tagged with. While there are some WP:COI-related neutrality issues here, in that there are a few places where the writing lapses into a public relations/advertorial tone rather than an encyclopedic one, that isn't a deletion reason in and of itself. There are things here (two albums, touring, media coverage) that satisfy WP:NMUSIC — so the problems with the article as currently written are maintenance issues rather than deletion issues, because if the basic notability is there in principle then any problems with the way in which the content is being presented are completely fixable. I'll take a stab later at improving the article for compliance with our content standards, but it's definitely not an outright deletion candidate. Bearcat (talk) 19:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)Reply