Talk:Champz
Add topic| 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 sourced must 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 has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Contested deletion
[edit]This page is not unambiguously promotional, because he got multiple sources. And the nominator should have did normal other than speedy deletion. To be discussed properly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ragnarok49 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
Contested deletion
[edit]I don't even find a reason why this should be speedy deletion. If you look through sources they are good. Over all, he is notable. Other than doing speedy deletion, just correct and make changes to the article where you feel the words are promotional. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ragnarok49 (talk • contribs) 10:35, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
- @TitCrisse, I don't see this as meeting the G11 criteria; even if a lot of the sources are blatantly promotional, the article content isn't bad and the subject (surprisingly) meets GNG. -- Reconrabbit (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
A topic to discuss.
[edit]@Reconrabbit: If you look through the internet, Champz is a breakout artist in 2025. And he has alot of media coverage which I didn't use most of them here. But, I noticed @TitCrisse is trying to sabotage it. He first added the Notability tag, but I removed it pointing it meets General Notability (GNG). But TitCrisse went ahead to add possible paid tag on it. Please I want you to address this as an admin. Thank you. Ragnarok49 (talk) 23:29, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
- Hi, since the article appears to be neutral, I have removed the UPE tag. Regards, quebecguy ⚜️ (talk | contribs) 01:52, 17 September 2026 (UTC)
- Hello. The contributor in question has just been globally banned for abusing multiple accounts. Given the circumstances and the nature of the edits, I am going to put the paid tag back as it specifically says "may have" which I believe is the case here. Thank you, TitCrisse (t•c) 14:31, 21 September 2026 (UTC).