Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:33, 4 February 2024

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Bands and musicians. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Bands and musicians|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bands and musicians. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Related deletion sorting

Bands and musicians

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 withdrawn by nominator‎. (non-admin closure) ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blessed Be This Nightmare

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

Cannot find enough independent reliable sources about this album for it to be able to pass WP:NALBUM. Aside from passing mentions in the scant coverage of Eternal Lord itself, I can find exactly one actual review for this album from a reliable source, in The Ottawa Citizen. Would appreciate if someone with access to older UK offline sources could see if they can dig up anything about this album. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 20:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator as per added sources below (although I'm not too confident on the reliability of Heavymetal.dk and will remove the Allmusic ref with no staff review as per WP:ALLMUSIC pinktoebeans ^(talk) 19:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I added some reviews and references after a little digging. Isaidnoway (talk) 08:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, and England. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 20:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:58, 4 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.

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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rufai Waris

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

Draftified the article for sile purpose of being improved. Yet moved back to main space without addressing citation needed tags and notability. Clearly fails WP:GNG. A thorough name of the artist cannot be seen on google /bing search before talking about references. The article cited sources which seems to be obvious blog and non of them is reliable. Otuọcha (talk) 10:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Otuọcha (talk) 10:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I firmly believe that article is justified and should not be deleted. It can be strengthened. I have already added two additional sources which I believe are stronger than what is cited above. The number of links to the page should not be a criteria for deletion.‪Pfomma‬ (talk) 5:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: sources are press releases or promotional puff pieces by dubious publications that have no indication they meet WP:RS. S0091 (talk) 18:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:49, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have thoroughly researched about the subject of the article and must say there was no sign of notability. Failed WP: ANYBIO, WP: SIGCOV. Otuọcha (talk) 11:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG or WP:NSINGER. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete subject has not been discussed in reliable sources to establish notability. Best, Reading Beans 17:37, 21 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.

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 snow keep. Mach61 (talk) 19:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)(non-admin closure)‎[reply]

Christopher Brown (British composer)

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

Fails wp:anybio

https://londonlibrarymembership.b2clogin.com/londonlibrarymembership.onmicrosoft.com/B2C_1A_SusiOrSspr_SAML/samlp/sso/login - just links to a login page

https://www.lennoxberkeley.org.uk/articles/bach-and-lennox-berkeley - is written by the composer so isn't independent or secondary.

https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095530447 - is a routine discography on a reference site that isn't regarded as a reliable source and has no relationship to Oxford University

http://www.musography.co.uk/Page%202.html - musicography is just a miscellaneous music blog

https://www.britishmusicsociety.co.uk/2024/01/christopher-brown-24-preludes-and-fugues/ - This is a routine book review

This composer also fails WP:MUSICBIO tand WP:COMPOSER because they havent had any significant major label releases, they haven't contributed to any notable soundtracks or performed with any notable ensembles and as far as I can see they have no named chair at a major university. Signal Crayfish (talk) 14:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I firmly believe that this composer article is justified and should not be deleted. It can be strengthened. I have already added two sources which I believe are stronger than what is cited above. I will do my best to help preserve this article. SpookiePuppy (talk) 16:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Entry in Grove Music Online ([1]), entry in The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Music, entry in Contemporary Composers ([2]) -- meets WP:GNG. Jfire (talk) 02:19, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies GNG. For the purpose of our notability guidelines for authors, there is no such thing as a "routine" book review. This article is not about an organisation. A book review can be "insignificant" if it is so brief and short that it is not lengthy enough to pass GNG, but it cannot be "routine". James500 (talk) 08:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I can fix the Grove Dictionary of Music link (sorry, my mistake, the link was to my library access portal), though it's a subscription service, so the whole article won't be available. Brown is retired now but was at RAM for 40 years and retains links to King's College. He is a composer of many substantial works that (especially choirs) still perform, so there's a need for reference material. The two main reasons I added the article were that 1) many links to the American composer Chris Brown's entry should actually have referred to the British Chris Brown (I have now fixed them), and 2) The new recording of his 24 Preludes has just come out, and new reviews are likely to come out over the next few months - with other works likely to be recorded as well. He was the teacher of at least three blue link composers and of at least one more that would justify his own entry. There's room to expand the article by going into the music in more depth. On the Lennox Berkeley link, there's no need for independence here - LB was a very famous composer, the proof that he taught Christopher Brown is not disputed. The link was included to help explain how Berkeley influenced Christopher Brown's music.Sfjohna (talk) 12:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Oxford Reference link is from Oxford University Press (closely linked to Oxford University), and the publisher of the Oxford Dictionary of Music (sixth edition, 2012 revised). The text shown from the link is taken directly from the Dictionary.Sfjohna (talk) 14:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SNOW Keep: Obviously, a Grove entry is an open-and-shut case for establishing notability. Thanks to all those who have improved the article! Why? I Ask (talk) 23:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:28, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata I created a new Wikidata entity so that the Authority Control could be addressed. I added quite a lot of referenced statements before I realised that there was already an entity in existence and linked to the French Wikipedia article. I have now merged these entities into one and tidied up the surviving one. See: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123574568 SpookiePuppy (talk) 16:56, 4 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 12:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Theory in Practice

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

Tagged for notability since 2022, unreferenced since 2008. Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG or WP:BAND, no real coverage beyond reviews on fan sites and similar. The dewiki article seems to have a total of one maybe reliable source for the purposes of notability, but I can't find anything else. AlexandraAVX (talk) 11:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Sweden. AlexandraAVX (talk) 11:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unconvinced by the reliability of any of the sources that came up in my WP:BEFORE besides a single article from Metal Injection, which in itself is borderline. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 15:21, 3 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 04:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wee Bee Foolish

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

Unsourced music bio from 2007. WP:BEFORE yields very little, and far from meeting WP:MUSICBIO. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Does not pass GNG. Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 04:26, 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.

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. ✗plicit 00:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Szabo

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC, lacks independent sigcov to establish notability. Jdcooper (talk) 00:19, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Canada, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are enough sources out there to meet WP:NMUSIC / WP:GNG.

"Szabo happy singing her own tune". The Hamilton Spectator. 2010-04-01. p. 41. Retrieved 2024-02-10.
"Dundas singer Maggie Szabo making her mark in L.A." The Hamilton Spectator. 2016-03-26. p. 41. Retrieved 2024-02-10.
"34 Canadian Songwriters Honoured in US-Based 2014 International Songwriting Competition". The Canadian Music Educator. Vol. 56, no. 4. ProQuest 1710994371. It notes: A soulful Canadian singer who has won over audiences worldwide, with 13 million views on YouTube, Maggie Szabo honed her craft at a young age in her hometown of Dundas. Following her high school graduation, she moved to Nashville to continue the quest to improve her writing and performing. Her original sound, infused with soulful pop melodies, secured Maggie a record deal with Linus Entertainment in Ontario. Her debut pop album Now Hear Me Out was released in November, 2012. Maggie was named Bell Media's Emerging chosen by famed blogger Perez Hilton as his "Can YOU Sing?" contest winner. He hailed Maggie as a superstar on the rise. She also is the winner of the 2014 Toronto Independent Music Award in the Best Pop category.
Crowley, Patrick (2017-09-19). "Maggie Szabo Premieres 'Don't Give Up' Music Video As a Love Letter To Trans Youth". Billboard. Retrieved 2024-02-10.
Tagat, Anurag (2020-10-16). "Premiere: Canadian Pop Artist Maggie Szabo Sings About Taking Chances in Love for 'Worth The Weight'". Rolling Stone India. Retrieved 2024-02-10.

Jfire (talk) 06:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - this article needs clean up, but there is also coverage in American Songwriter [3], [4] and The Advocate [5] that could help. Beccaynr (talk) 05:49, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:04, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: New sources identified above seem to satisfy GNG Oaktree b (talk) 00:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: And Billboard [6] Oaktree b (talk) 00:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: undoubtedly, especially the Billboard source, which is most reliable for musician pages. Password ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:42, 22 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.

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 merge‎ to DMC World DJ Championships as it looks likely that the target will be kept. Should that change, this will be resolved as a deleted redirect Star Mississippi 23:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disco Mix Club

AfDs for this article:

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

Non notable, per both WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Sources cited are non-independent, and a Google search fails to find anything suggesting that the necessary level of in-depth independent coverage can be found. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:43, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Entertainment. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:43, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:31, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:31, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect into the much more notable event that Disco Mix Club created: DMC World DJ Championships. On the basis of two assumptions: (1) if significant coverage is found later then redirect keeps the history, and (2) the proposed target passes AfD. ResonantDis_tortion 19:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per ATD. Okoslavia (talk) 18:39, 9 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.

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. SIGCOV met with reliable sources. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DMC World DJ Championships

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

Non notable, per WP:GNG. Neither of the independent sources cited covers the topic in any depth, and an online search finds nothing obvious to suggest that the required level of sourcing can be found elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Music. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a big event in the turntablism world. While the article may be poor there is a significant amount of independent coverage available - with statements such as "The event is a showcase of the world’s best scratch DJ’s who play portable turntables and vinyl" in a reliable music source ([7]). Other WP:RS/WP:RSMUSIC coverage includes [8] and [9] and [10]. A quick look on ProQuest and there is a lot more. ResonantDis_tortion 19:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not voting yet, but I will say for now that the company behind this has been on a crusade to edit-war a 27000-byte list of every winner of every variant of the competition into the article ([11] [12] [13] [14]), so if this article does continue to exist after this the article needs some form of protection--and more watchers, because if e.g. it gets semi-protected and the company creates another account to edit it, I'll no longer be able to revert them. 2603:8001:4542:28FB:D1A0:7BBB:E6CF:5C27 (talk) 20:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC) (Please send talk messages here instead)[reply]
(Personal attack removed) 2001:56B:3FF1:1F4D:C499:C323:8671:C49B (talk) 11:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. ResonantDis_tortion 00:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Has in-depth mentions in The Cambridge Companion to Hip-Hop ISBN 9781316239926 and Groove Music: The Art and Culture of the Hip-Hop DJ ISBN 9780199913015. It is described as having an "enormous impact on the development of playing skills" in the former. Why? I Ask (talk) 01:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on recent changes[15], Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:54, 6 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 23:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Ski

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

Non-notable music artist. No significant coverage or secondary coverage seems to really exist. No notable albums. Was created in 2004 back when notability guidelines were a lot less stringent, so I've heard. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 22:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Entertainment-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Youtube, facebook, Bandcamp, tik tok... I can't find RS for this individual. Oaktree b (talk) 16:23, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: inclined per failing WP:NSINGER. no coverage/source found to verify per WP:RS. CSMention269 (talk) 11:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Okoslavia (talk) 18:36, 9 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.

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 delete‎. Star Mississippi 17:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spaceline (band)

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

Doesn't meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 18:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agree that this seems to be a clear failure of WP:NBAND. Nothing really in google other than hits on the unrelated Space Adventures and nothing in archived newspapers. Much of the article also seems to be WP:COI additions from an individual identified as a founding member. Created at a time when scrutiny was low and doesn't seem to have been challenged in that time. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agreed with nomination - clear notability failure. There is no real evidence I can find the band existed, with search engine hits mainly returning the wiki page. ResonantDis_tortion 18:23, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom and the above. Fails WP:BAND, and almost nothing is found on Google that mentions this band. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 06:14, 6 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.

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 redirect‎ to Tjodalv. as an ATD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gromth

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

Tagged for notability for 11 years. Really badly sourced. I don't think this metal band really meets any criterion of WP:NBAND. They only released one album, which was supposedly "album of the month" in Scream (magazine), and Rock Hard did feature it, but I can't find anything else. There were no reviews and barely any news in the Norwegian mainstream press. The article previously claimed to meet WP:NBAND#6 by claiming that Kjell Karlsen was a member, who was 80 years at the time, but the real name of the Gromth member is Kjell Åge Karlsen (though that guy is a member of another notable band, Chrome Division). Geschichte (talk) 20:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Norway. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Tjodalv. Could not find SIGCOV sources other than an entry in a niche metal encyclopedia. Has been deleted after a debate from Nowiki. Nom participated in that. One band member has a biography where the band is mentioned in a discography header. The band lilely stopped activities in 2013 or soon after. Nothing updated since and the website has been inactive since 2013. gidonb (talk) 03:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The entire History section is unencyclopedic and unsourced (except for them losing the Melodi Grand Prix), and does not meet WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 23:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:32, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not seeing any significant coverage to justify an article. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 21:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Tjodalv as an ATD. Couldn't find sources to justify a stand-alone article. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:28, 26 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Telltale (Rainbow)

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

There are no notability-supporting sources in the article currently, and my BEFORE check did not find any to add. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Television, and United Kingdom. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:26, 1 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 06:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adele Holness

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

All this article has going for it is that she was featured on a song that doesn't even have an article. I am having difficulty finding any in-depth sources or sources outside of her association with that song. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 04:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Streaming sites, tik tok, links to listen to the song mentioned here. Nothing for this person, zero hits in Gnews. Oaktree b (talk) 05:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I only found what Oaktree b found, a/k/a nothing that establishes notability. JSFarman (talk) 18:23, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Dance, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 23:53, 2 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.

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 delete‎. G4 and SALTing can be applied by any admin if disruptive recreation is a problem. Owen× ☎ 16:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Theo Lengyel

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

Lengyel does not meet the specific criteria for notability of musicians: he was a member of Mr. Bungle, but criterion 6 requires having been a "reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles". I have been unable to find much coverage of his time with the band, and it's not fully independent (such as the semi-official history of the band); such sources as there are disagree on what year he left. The article was started in 2005, and in December 2023 I found it containing uncited specifics and the only reference on his career being a dead reference for a disparaging quote. I searched for sources and rewrote it like this. (Morbidthoughts has since removed the sources on his career as insufficiently reliable for a BLP, after I noted the article at the BLP noticeboard.) The impetus for my edit was that he was in the news as a suspect in the disappearance of his girlfriend. Since then her body has been found, and he has been arrested and is being held on murder charges. I had meanwhile redirected the article to Mr. Bungle, but the news coverage led .usarnamechoice to revert that redirection on January 4. There have been several news articles. In addition to the SFGate article we are currently citing for his being a person of interest, there are The Santa Cruz Sentinel and NBC News. In addition to SFGate and Pitchfork that we currently cite for his arrest and the murder charge, there are The San Francisco Chronicle, the Associated Press, the Los Angeles Times, and The New York Times. The latest news I can find is on a second deferment of his arraignment, Santa CruzSentinel, January 16. The vast majority of this coverage is based on police announcements; for example, the statement that he has also gone by Mylo Stone, which I have been unable to corroborate—there is a younger musician called Mylo Stone who is a UK rapper, so I have recently reverted addition of that reported alias to the article. The LA Times article describes Lengyel's vehicle and gives its license plate. But that and the Mr. Bungle sources are pretty much it for biographical details; we know more about his girlfriend, thanks to coverage like that Santa Cruz Sentinel article. So the article is in effect a WP:BLP1E and bad from a WP:BLPCRIME point of view. The two claims of notability are both inadequate and don't add up to enough for an article. It would be pure WP:CRYSTAL to hold that the legal case will eventually provide sufficient coverage to overcome the "one event" problem, or lead a music journalist to write about his music career. So although this discussion will take up the time of members of the community, I believe that this biography of a living person needs to be deleted. Yngvadottir (talk) 01:45, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 February 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per Yngvadottir's excellent analysis above. As I commented when this was raised at WP:BLPN [16], being a member of a notable band doesn't inherently create independent notability, and nor does being arrested as a murder suspect. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete insufficient notability. - Altenmann >talk 03:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore the Redirect the nom recently created in keeping with ATD and protect that redirect to stop repeated recreation of a page. Nom rational is sound and well articulated. duffbeerforme (talk) 23:17, 1 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.

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 delete‎. Regardless of whether it should have been draftified or not, consensus is clear among established editors. Star Mississippi 02:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Young (artist)

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

Article was moved to draft space by an experienced editor, then moved back to article space by another editor. The subject doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG, it's difficult to find sources online because there is a better known glass artist of the same name. Current sources are of questionable quality (one is on a gallery website, another is an interview). The two inline citations were to Apple Music and Spotify, suggesting the article is here to promote the artist. Sionk (talk) 23:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. An article that has been around since 2010 should never be moved to draft space, certainly not without notifying all the editors who edited it over the years. If the subject is not notable, the article should be deleted through AfD discussion, but lack of inline sourcing or poor formatting are not justifiable reasons to draftify. Station1 (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly the point I made in my reply to Sionk. This article has been around for years and been contributed to by numerous editors. In my view the artist is notable as attested to by two cited independent reviews and a Swiss newspaper article. The fact that there is another artist of the same name is immaterial. Anyone is free to write an article about that particular subject using disambiguation. MrBongleton (talk) 00:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Just thought I'd make my stance more clear. I forgot to input my bold typeface. I've already shared my opinion here in my reply to Sionk. MrBongleton (talk) 01:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it seems to me that the sources are quite legitimate. One is a newspaper review for an exhibition the artist had in Bern, Switzerland, in 2011. There's a paywall for the newspaper in question (Der Bund) but that doesn't make the source any less legitimate. The relevant information is clearly visible in the newspaper article header (see link: https://www.derbund.ch/kontrapunkte-157989066396). There is also a review from Paris-based Le Musée Privé from 2011 which seems reliable (see link: https://web.archive.org/web/20120402105046/http://www.le-musee-prive.com/expositions/ben-young-locuslux-gallery-amsterdam.html). It's also worth pointing out that quite a few editors have contributed to this article over the past 8 years or more and none of them has seen fit to put it up for deletion. If you look at the artist's resume on his website (https://benyoungart.com/pages/about.html) you will also see a long list of exhibitions including ones referenced in this article (Group Exhbition: June 8/July 30 2011, Galerie Rigassi, corresponding to Der Bund article source, and Solo Exhibition: May 21/July 16 2011: Happy Nihilism, Locuslux Gallery, Amsterdam, corresponding to Le Musée Privé review). As an art historian interested in contemporary art I have found this article quite useful and knowing of the artist's work have contributed to it over the years as have others, evidently. Clearly the artist is also a recording musician but again that doesn't seem problematic. The biographical details referring to his musical activities are merely statements of fact that readers might actually find useful. MrBongleton (talk) 00:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, to be honest I'm surprised to see an article I contributed to and that's been around since 2010 being put up for deletion. I think it does what Wikipedia is here to do - inform. I don't think its deletion would benefit anyone. As mentioned by Mr Bongleton, there is a long list of exhibitions on the artist's website that correlate perfectly with the information in the Wikipedia article and indicate that the subject is notable. Artincider (talk) 00:54, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Bands and musicians, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep After a cursory Google search using the terms Ben Young artist and Ben Young painter I quickly came across several websites that reference his work including a British art publication called Trebuchet, based in London, that ran a review of his 2012 solo exhibition at Victory Gallery in Portland, Oregon USA. I have now updated that published review on his Wikipedia article under the references section. So there are now two newspaper / magazine articles referenced there that specifically review his work as well as two other online / print reviews of his exhibitions. Here are some of the links I found - bear in mind this was a fairly cursory search:

https://www.trebuchet-magazine.com/ben-young-victory-gallery-oregon/

https://artfacts.net/artist/ben-young/161486

https://www.mutualart.com/Artist/Ben-Young/8D9EB6E351DAE4E2

https://www.artnet.com/artists/ben-young/biography

http://undercoverpainter.blogspot.com/2010/11/ben-young.html?m=1

https://www.sarahmasaki.com/ben-young Artincider (talk) 02:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)nly s[reply]

Delete Sources are trivial mentions and WP:ROUTINE coverage. Article created and edited by a series of single purpose accounts, such as Bagman23, Insider.art, Arthurrubenstein, Artincider and MrBongleton. Comes nowhere close to meeting the WP:ARTIST notability guideline. Elspea756 (talk) 04:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
CU note Artincider and MrBongleton are being operated by the same person. I have blocked both, and have struck through one set of comments - obviously it is inappropriate for one person to attempt to have two voices in a discussion of this nature. I think it likely that they are being operated by the same person behind the string of accounts that have edited this article in series, but the old ones are stale - if any of them reactivate and engage in this discussion or continue editing the article, please let me know. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:23, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This artist does not meet WP:NARTIST. He has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:28, 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.

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. Consensus met for NLIST and can be expanded further. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Thai girl groups

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

Unreferenced; fails WP:NLIST. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 19:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Popular culture and Thailand. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 19:32, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the list of list-related discussions... one can't not appreciate that. We need more lists of lists of lists, though. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 19:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. There's no indication of the inclusion criteria (which could be fixed), and importantly, there don't appear to be any sources linking these bands together. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm not going to vote "keep" based on one source, but this peice from The Nation (Thailand) offers some evidence that Thai girl bands have been considered as a set (i.e meeting NLIST). Mach61 (talk) 00:13, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amend my vote to Keep based on this journal paper (which can be translated), which is all about the history of Thai girl groups. Definitely meets NLIST Mach61 (talk) 00:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Category:Thai_girl_groups exist, with ten entries. If the list only had notable Thai girl groups, it'd be a valid list. Right now most of those with their own articles aren't on this list. Dream Focus 17:05, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Mach61, or draftify until referencing is improved. It's a recognised grouping that's been extensively covered by sources. As for the selection criteria, per WP:CSC, I'd expect this list to be of the type "Short, complete lists of every item that is verifiably a member of the group." So every Thai girl group, blue-linked or not, should be included, as long as it's verifiable to a reliable source. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, since it could be expanded upon using articles from Category:Thai girl groups. Some1 (talk) 00:46, 9 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.

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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 00:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naang Naang

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

Does not appear to meet WP:GNG, although this is hampered by the relative inaccessibility of Burmese sources. Still, we have virtually nothing to go on here: the one secondary source cited is a blog of dubious reliability and further refers to Naang Naang not as a women but as a female-fronted shan rock group. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 16:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Myanmar. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 16:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drafty for now – While she may be notable, there is a lack of sources due to being a Shan language singer. The time of her popularity predates the media era, making information only available in printed newspapers. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any online sources in very few Shan language media, a situation comparable to the lack of media in the Tibet region. Despite this, I have alerted this AfD to editors in the Shan Wikipedia. Therefore, I opt to vote for the draft rather than deletion.1.47.14.130 (talk) 19:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft- As the author of this article I support this move, the Shan resources are hard to track down and getting would from Shan Wiki would be much helpful. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 17:44, 4 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.

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 merge‎ to 947 (radio station). Consensus for merging to radio station article, which can be further discussed outside AfD if appropriate. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:55, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Cowen

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

Borderline, but I couldn't establish that Cowen meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Any WP:ATD, such as redirect to Come Dine With Me South Africa, wouldn't really be helpful to readers. Boleyn (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(selectively) Merge to 947 (radio station). She actually has a fair bit of coverage, (for her book [17][18] among other things [19]) but it's almost all in primary sources. Mach61 (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Well known celebrity and radio presenter. Meets WP:GNG Coverage in secondary sources [20][21]. Longest running female morning radio show host in South Africa[22]. Sunday Times/Times Live [23] [24][25][26]. News24 [27] [28][29][30]. There's also lots of coverage around Jeremy Mansfield, but I've only added sources that cover her. I can look for more sources. Nominators for South African articles should at least search News24, TimesLive and IOL for coverage. Park3r (talk) 00:58, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Park3r Please read WP:NEWSPRIMARY, and select which, if any, of these sources are not primary sources. Mach61 (talk) 03:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NEWSPRIMARY is an essay, not a policy. Furthermore even that essay identifies book reviews as secondary sources of which there are at least two above. Park3r (talk) 03:42, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They should also search The South African, every source mentioned by Park3r is secondary and the first half are green sources. dxneo (talk) 13:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, you should probably also do a formal keep vote if you believe the sources are reliable and the article is notable. Park3r (talk) 23:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed those sources before posting my !vote and then saw this. I disagree that these sources establish notability. All of the News24 sources are routine or run-of-the-mill coverage. 11 is a brief intro to a now unavailable "honest and open Facebook post." 12 and 13 are run-of-the-mill coverage noting her announcement that she was leaving 94.7. 14 is the same regarding 91.9. This and this are interviews and this is an excerpt from her book. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect~~ Merge to 947 (radio station)#Breakfast Show History: She's certainly a well-known radio personality in South Africa, and she has regularly received coverage in the media, but all of the coverage appears to be routine (such as announcements of her leaving a radio station), media stunts, or quoting her social media posts. I think redirecting to the above article is appropriate because she appears to be best associated with that show. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC), changed to merge per Mach61. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from nominator merge to radio station does look like a good option. Boleyn (talk) 12:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per others. This might be a case of redirect with possibilities, where sufficient WP:RS coverage does exist, but hasn't been brought forward in the article or this AfD, or where we can assume (without wishing to violate WP:CRYSTALBALL) that other sources could emerge in the next few years that might just tip the subject into clearer notability. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 02:15, 16 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.

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. ✗plicit 11:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fergus James

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

Notability not shown, indicated, no reliable sources. Speedy delete? BoraVoro (talk) 10:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've added sources and references i think he is definitely notable enough having 5 songs with 1,000,000+ streams on Spotify and 2 with 5,000,000+. FFelxii (talk) 11:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain to me which part of WP:RSPYT you don't understand? TarnishedPath^talk 13:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen many other articles do similar things where they link the YouTube page for the song on artists so I thought i was allowed. For example the Andy Bull page uses YouTube videos as references in the same way sorry for any misunderstanding. FFelxii (talk) 13:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have a read of the link. YouTube sources can be used, but not in the way you did. If Fergus's notability is going to be established then it needs to be done with secondary sources. TarnishedPath^talk 13:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube sources can be used. They can even be used like that, because those links WP:Verify that he really did sing a song of that name, etc. But a link to a webpage (YouTube or otherwise) that was posted by a person/band/business can never demonstrate Wikipedia:Notability of that same person/band/business. So while those links were okay, they were not pointful for the purpose of determining whether to keep the article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing, thank you for the correction. TarnishedPath^talk 09:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (weak). The external links added to the article are all a bit problematic in one way or another. Some are lacking in depth, some are interviews (not ideal as a source), some are not quite independent of the subject and the one I'd bet on [31] is unfortunately paywalled. However, we do have the title "Armidale boy Fergus James to support Ed Sheeran on Australian tour " and the date (2018) which show that James has been on the radar for quite some time. (Also, opening for Ed Sheeran is a big deal). I also found this which provides somewhat significant coverage. This and this lack depth but it's still coverage. This is a more recent interview. All in all, I think we have (though barely) enough to pass WP:GNG. Pichpich (talk) 18:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Thank you for providing some sources that can help keep the page. FFelxii (talk) 04:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of the sources identified above by Pichpich. I haven't done a full search yet but I did find a bio at AllMusic here which states that his first hit single charted which i'll look into, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:17, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I've just added a bunch of references. Not all have in-depth coverage, but some do. One in particular is a live review of one of his performances in Melbourne at The Workers Club. I'd say that there is enough to pass WP:GNG. TarnishedPath^talk 10:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on sources added.
BoraVoro, did anyone ever tell you about WP:NEXIST? This is probably not obvious – the telephone game by which we oversimplify and overstate the rules to make newbies do what we want with as little effort as possible on our part causes real problems over time – but we don't actually have any guideline or policy that endorses "Notability not shown" as a valid reason for deletion; instead, we have a rule that says that what matters is whether reliable sources are in the real world (libraries, bookstores, the internet) and explicitly not whether those sources are already WP:Glossary#cited in the article. If a WP:BEFORE search (which you didn't mention doing, but I hope you did) is not very helpful, then please consider a {{notability}} tag or WP:BLPPROD instead of an AFD. (I'd have chosen BLPPROD myself.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
very good point, thank you! BoraVoro (talk) 07:37, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found a charting ref for a single. I don't know if this is what the AllMusic bio's writer referred to.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 04:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please don't bomb the article with a dozen Youtube links again. This is not what Wikipedia is for. Geschichte (talk) 11:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes WP:GNG. LKBT (talk) 12:18, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment More information under his full name/alternative name.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:01, 6 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.

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. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa Onuorah

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

Not meeting ANYBIO, GNG or SIGCOV. BoraVoro (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Dance, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Known for her influence to another person? I can only find stories about her (?) husband that passed, nothing about a musical career. Oaktree b (talk) 14:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I wrote this article in a novice way since I am having mental health challenges. Obviously passes WP: GNG. Has featured with notable Nigerian musicians and even WP: CREATIVE, Since she is widely known for promoting the Igbo dance, Egedege. Otuọcha (talk) 18:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:09, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is significant coverage in Opara, Ruth (2018). "We Can Sing It Without Doing It: Gender Contestation Among Nigerian and South African Women in Music" (PDF). American Music Research Center Journal. 27: 77–120. Queen Theresa Onuorah was born in the 1940s, and is a traditional female musician from Umuorji village in Anambra state, South-Eastern Nigerian, West Africa, where she is well known for her self-created Egedege dance. ... As one of the oldest of her siblings, and recognized for her creativity, she became the leader of the group and taught her younger siblings. In 1974, she led her family members who later joined the group to the recording studio where they recorded most of their songs including Ijele Elubego. After the recording, the accompanying video became popular and was much appreciated in Igbo land, being one of the few indigenous music videos in the 1970s. ... Onuorah used her music to revitalize the traditional folk and dance music of the Umuorji and Anambra. She gained a reasonable number of fans due to her performances of Igbo folk and traditional dance in South-Eastern Nigeria.

Other sources include:

"Ndi Otiegwu Igbo kpọtụrụ akpọtụ na 90s rue afọ 2000". BBC News Ìgbò (in Igbo). 2020-09-11. Retrieved 2024-02-14.
"Igbo Traditional Music: Ikperikpe ọgụ, Atịlọgwụ, Egedege na egwu ọdịnala ndị ọzọ e ji mara ndị Igbo". BBC News Ìgbò (in Igbo). 2022-08-27. Retrieved 2024-02-14.
Alake, Motolani (2021-10-29). "Here is why Larry Gaaga's 'Egedege' is trending [Pulse Editor's Explainer]". Pulse Nigeria. Retrieved 2024-02-14.

For an African musician most active in the 1970s, there is a strong WP:SYSTEMICBIAS against the availability of online sources, so the fact that we have these is a strong indication of notability. Jfire (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: BEFORE suggests WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:44, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't commend the lack of BEFORE done by the nominator. There are books and analysis concerning Theresa Onuorah and her works. Best, Reading Beans 09:37, 21 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.

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 no consensus‎. WP:NPASR applies. ✗plicit 23:45, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yakov Kazyansky

AfDs for this article:

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

Last AfD was a weak keep with low participation in 2008, when standards were lower. I couldn't establish that he meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG, or a good WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 09:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. A google search for his name in Russian gives several hits. At least 3 of these are about his role in organising the first ever performance in the USSR of Jesus Christ Superstar, which would probably be worth adding to the article, if only as a curiosity:

Local/regional coverage: Yarkipedia: КАЗЬЯНСКИЙ Яков Лазаревич (NB: article is signed by author, it's not a wiki); Severni Krai (regional newspaper): Антиреалист Казьянский и его религия, same article scanned from the paper version of the newspaper [32] (NB: author of this piece is presumably the author of the article for the local encyclopedia); Yaroslavl region section of the Union of Artists of Russia (short bio on account of one of his performances): Концерт №2 цикла "Музыкальные среды" (NB: possibly falls under promotional, but I think it sort of helps with notability); Rybinski dnevnik (local news portal): В Ярославле отметили 30-летие российской премьеры рок-оперы «Иисус Христос — суперзвезда»; Yaroslavl edition of Komsomolskaia Pravda: В России рок-оперу «Иисус Христос Суперзвезда» впервые увидели в Рыбинске

National coverage: Article/interview published by LIFE (NB: unrelated to Life (magazine)) (Russian Как "Иисуса Христа — суперзвезду" ставили в Рыбинске в 1989 году

Participation in international-ish events: Prostokvashino festival (North Carolina) [33] (NB: event seems to cater to Russian-speaking diaspora groups in the US)

This list is non-exhaustive but I think it might be enough to establish notability and probably allows for the writing of a decent enough article (it probably needs updating, too - he seems to have recently moved to the US). Ostalgia (talk) 12:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:09, 14 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sheila Scribner

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

Lack of reliable sources to establish notability, and no source given at all for the claim that she died. LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 21:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Bands and musicians, Egypt, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I couldn't find anything on Newspapers Extended. BBQboffin^{grill me} 23:16, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from nominator: Since according to the article, she is (or was) primarily active in Arabic-speaking countries, perhaps someone who can read Arabic should check to see if there are usable sources in that language that refer to her. I’ve been scouring the Internet for days and have found very little in English (none of which meets WP:RS standards). LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 00:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additional nominator comment: There is also an Indonesian-language version of this article, which has even fewer sources and does not claim that she died. Rather strangely, no Arabic-language article exists despite the fact that she was primarily active in Arab countries. Given what I’ve managed to find on the Internet, it’s clear that the subject of this article really existed (I couldn’t find anything verifying that she died, although all her social media accounts have been inactive for years). But she doesn’t seem to pass the notability threshold. In any case, if this article is deleted, the Indonesian version probably should be too.LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 01:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Well I find obituaries, but that's all the coverage there is. Career appears non-notable. Sources used in the article aren't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 00:07, 14 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.

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 no consensus‎. ✗plicit 04:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Álvarez

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

BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Source in article is IMDB and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Found name mentions, listings, nothing meeting SIGCOV. BLPs require strong sourcing. // Timothy :: talk 12:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a few sources. Might meet WP:NACTOR. Coverage about her private life and how much she has changed since she played a nerdy teenager in a 2003-2004 telenovela also exists. So Redirect to Alegrijes y Rebujos#Main. Not opposed to keep. Rather opposed to deletion.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 15:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Based on the article subject's location, it seems unlikely that she would receive English-language coverage unless she attains international fame, which is not a threshold for notability. WP:NONENG sources are perfectly valid. I ran the sources recently added to the article through a browser translator, and they appear to discuss her directly and in-depth, and I see no reason to doubt their reliability or independence. Left guide (talk) 10:24, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. The El Heraldo source is the only notability-establishing source I could find. There are other sources mentioning her, but they either lack significant coverage or are primary sources (as is the case with all the "look at where the actors of this kids show are now" articles). I don't think a possible NACTOR case justifies keeping an article that can't be expanded beyond a stub, and redirecting to one show seems arbitrary. Mach61 (talk) 14:40, 21 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 12:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shadaab–Abhik

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

I am skeptical that this singer-songwriter duo meets the standards outlined by GNG. In my initial search, I couldn't find any coverage that would qualify as GNG-worthy. AmusingWeasel (talk) 13:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. AmusingWeasel (talk) 13:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't find anything about the duo. There is some coverage about Shadaab Hashmi but not enough for notability and only mentions about Abhik Chatterjee. S0091 (talk) 16:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. wound theology ◈ 09:15, 14 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 13:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starry (musician)

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

Not yet notable per WP:MUSICBIO. All I can find in an online search in English is about the same as the current sources: a mix of interviews (WP:PRIMARY) in RS like Daily Trust, Daily Nigerian and Nigerian Tribune, and puff pieces on music blogs. The RS also pretty consistently describe her as "upcoming", "budding", etc. She's put out a single EP, with no charts in evidence, the sources cited for regular radio rotation are music blogs, and the station named isn't national per WP:MUSICBIO #11. Wikishovel (talk) 09:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Nigeria. Wikishovel (talk) 09:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Sources do not provide SIGCOV and are not INDEPENDENT Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces for WP:MUSICBIO . 11. Of it talked about air rotation play and this was cited [34] Princeisrael2728 (talk) 14:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MUSICBIO #11 says "Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network", and HotFM is not a national radio station. Wikishovel (talk) 14:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. That piece from Leadership is obviously a paid piece, I know that. Even if it is not, the headline is disproportionate to the content. Moreover, Hot FM is not a national radio station, so I am curious how they can achieve a national rotation. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanderwaalforces I see hot FM has branches in major cities like Lagos, Abuja, Oweri, Port Harcourt [35] Princeisrael2728 (talk) 15:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't make it a national radio, not as far as I can tell. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanderwaalforces the cite also mention Vybes FM and others

That means hot FM was not the only radio which played the song Princeisrael2728 (talk) 11:15, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The guideline states may be notable if they meet at least one of the criteria and WP:MUSICBIO #11 is a weak claim for notability even if supported, especially for a contemporary musician where in-depth coverage by independent RS should be easily available. All of the sources say essentially the same things and/or are interviews and were all published within a month which suggests PR and also fails WP:SUSTAINED. S0091 (talk) 19:33, 12 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.

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 no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John LeCompt

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

Nominating for deletion on the basis of WP:DEL-REASON#8. I researched the topic of the article, after doing comprehensive research on the band Evanescence for which the subject was hired as a tour musician in 2003 and exited in 2007, and found that:

It does not meet WP:GNG, as it has not "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The media coverage I found that mentioned the subject was largely routine, alongside some press releases (WP:SBST and WP:NOTPROMO). I did not find significant converge that addresses the subject directly and in detail, and would provide sufficient content for a bio article that consists of more than "joined and left x,y,z band", "played/has a credit on x,y,z record", which is routine musician info that is mentioned in band or album articles (WP:WITHIN). Notability is not inherited from being a member of or associated with bands.

Does not meet WP:NRV: "No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists: the evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interested, nor a result of promotional activity or indiscriminate publicity".

Does not meet WP:SUSTAINED: "Brief bursts of news coverage may not sufficiently demonstrate notability. ... If reliable sources cover a person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having a biographical article on that individual."

Does not meet the WP:MUSICBIO criteria, including "Members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability." Lapadite (talk) 08:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Lapadite (talk) 08:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Arkansas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:MUSICBIO criterion 6, is a member of at least two notable bands and a touring member of another. See also WP:NSMT, an essay I wrote explaining why we have the criteria as we do. Jclemens (talk) 05:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't "significant independent coverage" that supports that the subject is a "reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles". WP:MUSICBIO also states: "regardless of what notability criterion is being claimed, the claim must be properly verified by reliable sources independent of the subject's own self-published promotional materials. ... notability is not determined by what the article says, it is determined by how well the article does or does not support the things it says by referencing them to independent verification in reliable sources." Nearly all the content on this article, which was added without sources by mostly one person in the 2000s according to the page history, can be deleted because there isn't independent, reliable sources to support it. And there are bands linked in the article that are likely not notable either. The little that is in reliable sources pertaining to this subject can be and is mentioned in a band article or album article, which mostly boils down to: "x joined in y year, exited in z year", "x has credit on y record". There are other non-notable individuals associated with bands that are mentioned in the relevant band or album articles.

Notability is not inherited: Any given band being notable does not automatically make anyone and everyone associated with it a notable individual. Any person getting "brief bursts of news coverage", especially in relation to routine band news - such as a band releasing something, touring, the exit of a member - does not automatically make them a notable individual. The other guidelines I linked also note this, such as, "the evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest, nor a result of promotional activity or indiscriminate publicity" in the main notability guideline. Lapadite (talk) 22:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 04:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Jclemens. The article, as is, is supported by indipendent sources, the MUSICBIO case is inarguable, and redirection per WP:NOPAGE is undesirable as there is no clear target. Mach61 (talk) 04:40, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't misrepresent the sourcing in deletion discussions. "The article, as is, is supported by indipendent sources" - it is not, and that's plainly evident by looking at the references. The few refs are about routine band news and an old Yamaha site with standard label/PR-fed content. Nothing that remotely supports individual notability based on WP's guidelines. From my research, there aren't multiple independent sources focused on this subject, not even from the early 2000s when he played on tour during the band Evanescence's major commercial success. There are also several bands linked in this article that are not notable, and their articles are templated as such. Lapadite (talk) 13:02, 22 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.

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 delete‎. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shalkal Carty

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

One of countless promotional non-notable artist wiki pages entirely created by one new user. 6 Google News hits from really non-notable sources, and that's it. A desperate attempt to raise the profile of the subject. Fred Zepelin (talk) 03:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Music. Fred Zepelin (talk) 03:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Dance, Jamaica, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, only primary sources located. Mach61 (talk) 04:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, There seems to be more than enough references to keep a posting about Shalkal Carty. I think that the page certainly is within the realm of the spirit of Wikipedia. Feerfox (talk) 15:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the sockpuppet discussion involving this voter. Fred Zepelin (talk) 21:18, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feerfox has been confirmed as a sockpuppet. I feel confident that striking that vote is in order. Fred Zepelin (talk) 01:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, The article has been written in a neutral point of view and needs citation for the points that lack them. It should be have been tagged with need for verification rather than asking for deletion of the page. Showergirl (talk) 16:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, The article satisfies all Wikipedia guidelines and meet requirements for notability. It should be kept for future improvements by editors Augmere40 (talk) 14:37, 5 February 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:55, 6 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.

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. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any Given Sin

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

Non notable band. Jax 0677 (talk) 23:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Found two sources from WP:ALBUMSOURCES search engine: [36] [37] The rest of the sources are AllMusic reviews. Other sources (not in the list) include: [38] Brachy08 _(Talk) 02:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Maryland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Also found [39], [40], [41], [42], maybe this one as well [43]. Geschichte (talk) 08:43, 29 January 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:13, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dublin Duck Dispensary

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

Can't find any significant independent reliable sources about this project. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 16:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Ireland. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 16:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing to indicate that WP:SIGCOV or WP:BAND are met. In terms of SIGCOV, a search in "main stream" national news outlets in Ireland (the Irish Times, Irish Independent, Irish Examiner, etc) returns nothing at all. Zero news results. Not even trivial passing mentions. Entertainment and music outlets (like Hotpress Magazine and RTÉ Entertainment) return the same trivial passing "gig announcement notices" we see in the article itself. Like this and this. The definition of trivial/passing mentions. That we are reliant on scant coverage (in blogs and myspace pages), to establish even the basic facts, is somewhat telling. The ONLY coverage in the article, of which the subject is the main topic, is this write up in Analogue Magazine. But one piece of coverage (in a short-lived freesheet magazine left in colleges, coffee shops and entertainment venues) does not amount to SIGCOV. In terms of NBAND, the subject doesn't appear to have released albums on a major label, charted anything/anywhere or received notable awards. Was likely WP:TOOSOON when created (and, in honesty, kinda surprised it survived this long). NOTE: If the article on the musician's other performing name (the subject of a parallel discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No Monster Club) is retained, there might just about be a case for this title being a redirect. As an WP:ATD. But barely.... Guliolopez (talk) 14:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to No Monster Club. Agreed with nom and above. I've found one hit in the Irish Times, but it's purely a listing, not sigcov:"New music". Irish Times. 15 May 2009. Bobby Aherne's one-man lo-fi blitz continues with current release, the Yves BasketEP. All fuzz, no quack.. Please ping me if anything sigcov does turn up. ResonantDis_tortion 13:41, 8 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.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:16, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No Monster Club

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

Can't find enough significant sources about this project for it to meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Most sources are either too short or mainly focus on another project by Bobby Aherne. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 16:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Ireland. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 16:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning Keep on this one - there are several independent citations referenced in the article to demonstrate compliance with WP:NMUSIC, including a staff bio with Allmusic, and a number of album reviews. ResonantDis_tortion 14:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:00, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I added reviews by GoldenPlec and State (magazine) I found at the fr article. S0091 (talk) 18:35, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If Bobby Aherne is not notable enough to warrant a page, then how can a side-project of said musician need one. If he is, then create one and merge this page into that. MNewnham (talk) 23:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what that means. A band can be notable even if individual members of the band aren't. Toughpigs (talk) 18:21, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with @Toughpigs - this AfD is focused on whether the band No Monster Club meets notability guidelines, primarily through analysis of available independent coverage. If an editor considers Bobby Aherne as independently notable then they can create a separate page. ResonantDis_tortion 19:37, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This review from the Dublin Gazette and the reviews added by S0091 are decent coverage. Toughpigs (talk) 00:44, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of reliable sources coverage referenced in the article such as the Irish Times, Chicago Reader, Dublin Gazette, AllMusic and others so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:52, 23 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.

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. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roland Richard

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

Can't see any credible claim to notabitilty here. TheLongTone (talk) 15:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if someone can write and source something better. There are potentially plausible notability claims here, but they aren't adequately supported by reliable sourcing — but notability doesn't hinge on what the article says, it hinges on how well the article can or can't reference the things it says to WP:GNG-worthy media coverage about the things it says. But given how heavily Quebec-based his career was, it's highly likely that if he has adequate reliable source coverage to pass GNG, most of it would be in French newspapers that I don't have adequate access to in order to be the fixer. But we also don't keep poorly sourced articles just because it's possible that better sourcing might exist somewhere than we've actually been able to find — we can only consider sources that are actually in evidence, so somebody who wanted to claim that he got over GNG on French-language coverage would actually have to find and show his French-language coverage, and we can't just keep the article on a presumption that he might have more in French than we've found in English. So, again, no prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can do better than this, and I'm willing to reconsider this if somebody can improve the article before this discussion even closes, but this as currently written and sourced isn't good enough. Bearcat (talk) 19:43, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly, I was a bit quick to publish this at first (I usually continue working/improving on an article over time) but was still surprised at it being flagged within seconds. At the moment, I've added sufficient citations/sources, and even though it is still a work in progress, I believe it will help you reconsider. Saucoin (talk) 00:45, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I added four references from newspaper articles that discuss Richard's qualifications: "U of O series to end with song recital" (Ottawa Journal, April 1972), "Richard ensemble highest in integrity" (The Leader-Post, February 1978), "Club to present The Magic Flute" (The Leader-Post, January 1974), and "Spanish guitarist, baritone to wrap up festival season" (The Chilliwack Progress, April 1977). Toughpigs (talk) 01:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Saucoin (talk) 17:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced either way, but just want to point out that the obvious WP:ATD would be a slight merge and redirect to Denise Massé. —Kusma (talk) 10:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the text that followed the link to his wife (pianist Denise Massé). I agree it did not jive well (i.e. conflation). Saucoin (talk) 14:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think recentism might be an issue here. References above are good enough. Here's another one from 1955. Also I see that User:Saucoin has added several sources to the article since the AFD started. Excellent work, but they should comment here instead of removing the AFD notice. Nfitz (talk) 21:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly, I was a bit quick to publish this at first (I usually continue working/improving on an article over time) but was still surprised at it being flagged within seconds. At the moment, I've added sufficient citations/sources, and it is still a work in progress. Saucoin (talk) 22:43, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 06:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for your interest. Can you please explain to me why you relisted the article. Note that current editor comments were addressed and the article has been substantially revamped with cited information and sources Saucoin (talk) 22:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, please consider withdrawing your nomination for withdrawal. The article has now significantly improved, including citations and sources, to allay your concerns. Saucoin (talk) 15:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saucoin: It's okay, you just need to be patient. People will see that the article has improved. It doesn't help to keep posting messages on this page, and it might hurt your cause. Toughpigs (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. In addition to the sources found during the course of the AfD, I want to highlight that the one linked by Nfitz strongly suggests that additional coverage exists - it mentions "national and international acclaim", which I might not trust on its own, but also a debut at Carnegie Hall in NY that was well received by critics, with quotations. Unless I've missed something above, we haven't found any of the critical response to that performance yet, but it clearly exists somewhere. -- asilvering (talk) 04:33, 12 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Steff

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

All claims to notability seem to be that he worked with notable people, but notability is not inherited. I couldn't establish that he himself meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG, or that there is a good WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 09:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:39, 28 January 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Dick

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

No clear evidence of individual notability; see WP:BANDMEMBER. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 05:23, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 05:23, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:41, 28 January 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.

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 no consensus‎. WP:NPASR applies. ✗plicit 10:43, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My Summer As A Salvation Soldier

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

My familiarity with Icelandic music isn't all it should be, but this guy doesn't seem to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:16, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iceland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Subject passes WP:GNG with significant coverage in the Icelandic media such as these [44][45][46][47]. Alvaldi (talk) 09:13, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:31, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:33, 11 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dan-O

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Most statements in article are sourced to the author's website, another to an article that mentions him, and another to IMDB. Searching only turns up results for "Dan O Seasoning" and the General Hospital writer, Dan O'Connor. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 20:36, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uncertain. While it once seemed that this guy (and especially his unusual business model) might be going somewhere, he does seem to have faded away. However, he seems no less notable than, say, the Hollywood Freeway chickens or Ayalahi, to name two. Minturn (talk) 20:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 20:36, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Connecticut, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as one reliable source does not an article make. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Of the current sources, the first is from the website of the company owned by the subject, the second is independent but lacks depth at only a couple of short sentences, and the third is a database. A BEFORE check doesn't come up with much else. Let'srun (talk) 01:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No SIGCOV and GNG. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 09:51, 7 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 01:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Apple

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NBAND or WP:GNG, or find a good WP:ATD. Not on a major label, no significant success. Boleyn (talk) 16:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nomination. Fails WP:BAND, and apart from the external links, there are no sources in the article whatsoever. I couldn't find any reliable sources that mention this band. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 06:06, 6 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.

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 delete‎. BusterD (talk) 03:30, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Akbar Ghelich

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

Fails WP:GNG/WP:NSINGER. No indication of notability or coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources to denote notability. nearlyevil 665 14:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil 665 14:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This person is not only because of his activities in the field of music, but also as the presenter of a program on Iranian television that was simultaneously broadcast on two national channel 2 [48] and Nasim TV [49], and was also welcomed. It can help to find more comprehensive information on the Internet. In addition, his program was not segmented and had 30 episodes and was a complete television program. And in Iran, he seems to be one of the popular presenters.Google Trends Search -- Meyboad (talk) 15:53, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:44, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:44, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:44, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:13, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Be omitted

Hello, as an Iranian wiki writer, I do not know this gentleman, and he is not known among Iranians either. And the sources mentioned are not enough, also the sources are personal blogs. Adolfzl64 (talk) 13:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Adolfzl64, I have no role in the article's retention or deletion, and I express my opinion as the author of this article.

I have extracted the sources of the article from reliable sites such as Iran's official TV channels [50][51], Tabnakjavan news agency and Iran's official IRIB news agency.In addition, I have included the music of the TV programs that this person was the singer of, from the main archive of Telewebion.[52] And I don't know which of the news are from the blogs that you are saying this. If I have included a blog as a news source, please let me know so I can correct it. Meyboad (talk) 02:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Radio of the Islamic Republic does not have a public audience. It is not valid because no one else is watching except for people like singer Mullahs and... And the government media has no credibility. among Iranians and the world. A media that proudly promotes war, bloodshed, lies and demagoguery, and the lack of women's rights and the LGBT community. There is no media that can give fame to a madah. Adolfzl64 (talk) 07:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion is mixed with politics, while Wikipedia's rules emphasize an unbiased opinion. It is written in the WP:NSINGER: A singer who performed the music of a television program that was broadcasted nationwide can be qualified as an encyclopedia. I have also created it according to the rules. Besides, you said at first that the sources are from blogs, but now you say that Iranian TV is invalid! So why didn't you explain the problem you made to the sources? Meyboad (talk) 11:58, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think that Nik Salehi and Tabnak Javan are independent and official news agencies? Performing a eulogy and music for a television program of the Islamic Republic It is interesting that dictators are praised. Adolfzl64 (talk) 14:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TabnakJavan has been operating independently as a Persian language news website since 2018, and a large number of Persian Wikipedia sources are also from this website, and it has a standard news process and an editor.[53] (I don't know which faction or political front he is connected to).

Nik Salehi is one of the most visited and old Iranian websites that publishes the biographies of famous Iranian people, and I only quoted the biographical part from this website.

However, I found more reliable sources from Mehr News Agency [54], Young Journalists Club [55], Borna News Agency [56] and ISNA News Agency [57], which are all official news agencies, and I will add these sources to the article. And thank you for making me find better and more reliable sources for the article. Meyboad (talk) 15:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:31, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails WP:GNG as I see it, I also have suspicions about it being an UPE article. Tehonk (talk) 02:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Can we focus on the sourcing including examining the new sources that have been added over the course of this AFD discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:56, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz there's a consensus for delete here with 3 delete votes, there's no keep other than the article creator, who will be blocked soon as a sock after I post my SPI, so this will be a G5 eligible too after all, I mean there's no need for these relists really. Tehonk (talk) 08:03, 17 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Heart Beats

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:NBAND or WP:GNG, or find a good WP:ATD. It metions Happening 68, a show they apparently won, but the link is a redirect elsewhere, it isn't a notable show. Very promotional article too. Boleyn (talk) 12:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:11, 2 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.

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 delete‎. If anyone is able to find sufficient source material to make this potentially viable, we can certainly talk about moving to a draft at that point. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zehra Bajraktarević

AfDs for this article:

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

Lacks sufficient coverage in independent sources to meet WP:GNG. Newspaper sources cited in the article are interviews. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:42, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:42, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only in Bosnian article it seems

https://bs.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zehra_Bajraktarevi%C4%87#/search ItsMeGabeProductions (talk) 14:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note - article was previously deleted from en wiki: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zehra Bajraktarević and the original article's author supported the deletion. OIM20 (talk) 20:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Weak keep. 195,000 hits on Google suggest notability and potential for other sources. The one article appears to be an interview but only a portion of it is accessible online, so we don't know for sure. She also appears to be included in a few books; however, they are not translatable to English to review. Rublamb (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move to AfC / Draftify. I realize this was translated from the Bosnian Wiki, but it doesn't feel like a complete article.

Analysis of available online resources:

My search only got 141K according to Google (and after clicking "show omitted", it only gave me 119K). Going through the 177 it let me scroll through before it told me I needed to click the "show omitted results" button, 129 of those were YouTube links. Only two that I saw went to news sites: one was a photo only, and one was an interview with someone who knows her. I saw at least two that were announcements of (at the time) upcoming events (ex). Some were announcements of (at the time) new releases (ex). Some of the YouTube and TikTok (22 of the 177) were of people doing covers of her songs. Other links were to lyric sites or places to listen to her music that aren't YouTube or TikTok. One was to a site that claims to have taken its information from biografija.org, but I searched of that site (to hopefully find sources) and couldn't find the article for her.

Several of the Google Books results were for materials that couldn't possibly include her (e.g.: The Most In-Depth Hacker's Guide and Hillary Clinton's How I Lost; and a search inside those showed no results so I don't know why Google would return them).

I did not find any resources when searching Internet Archive.

All of that said, I did go through all of the sites listed as Bosnian newspapers here, and found a few articles that do indicate notability, but unfortunately don't have much information.

-https://bosnjaci.net/prilog.php?pid=56417 -- brief mention as getting her start through the Bihac festival. It's an interview with Dilvad Felić Dado, creator of the festival.

-https://bosnjaci.net/prilog.php?pid=59730 -- interview where she states that she has been largely ignored by the media.

-https://bljesak.info/kultura/glazba/poslusajte-pjesmu-hiljadarka-iz-istoimenog-filma/134055 -- if I'm reading this correctly, the article's author calls her the doyen of Bosnia, which would definitely give her notability with her target audience.

-https://express.ba/izdvojeno/180682/mujo-isanovic-da-sam-bio-zaljubljen-u-zehru-bajraktarevic-ozenio-bih-je/ (also one of the Google news results) -- interview with Mujo Isanović where he states she was the "role model of Eastern Bosnia"

-https://www.klix.ba/magazin/kultura/koncert-ede-pandura-na-bascarsijskim-nocima/110722047 -- one of the artists listed performing alongside Eda Pandur.

-https://www.klix.ba/magazin/kultura/bascarsijske-noci-zavrsavaju-koncertom-sevdaha/120730068 -- one of the artists performing at the festival listed.

I haven't gone through all of the Serbian newspapers yet. I do wonder if applying US standard for cultural news reporting to foreign countries' standards is wholly fair, but I understand that we can't rely entirely on an interview with the subject of the article for encyclopedic content, which is what this article currently does (Discogs aside). OIM20 (talk) 23:08, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Found One https://www.kkbox.com/sg/en/artist/X_2qON0xnYXJGoI_2s

Gonna Add this now ItsMeGabeProductions (talk) 01:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not providing significant, independent coverage. I still don't see how WP:GNG is met here. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:03, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/talk¦contribs\ 21:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. // Timothy :: talk 17:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 00:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I believe the subject exists and seems a worthy artist. I'm not seeing any claim of notability. Why should Wikipedia cover this subject compared to other artists? It's not sufficient that the subject is verifiable; there must be direct detailing in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. I've looked at the provided sources, and I agree with the nominator. By my reading, it doesn't seem to pass WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. BusterD (talk) 03:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to AfC / Draftify per OIM20 if @ItsMeGabeProductions wants to work on it more; otherwise delete. Almost but not quite notable. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 18:10, 26 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:56, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

L'A Capone

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC with no chart or notable label activity backed by bad sourcing. Another drill rapper article in which the subject is hailed as some major figure of the genre with no evidence backing it up, while the only notable citations are mundane coverage of his criminal activity. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 19:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:30, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:30, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:33, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article are primary and mill news and BEFORE found mill news, promo, database records, nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 13:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per others. No in-depth coverage to meet GNG. S0091 (talk) 14:52, 14 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Kirk (disambiguation)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Stephen Kirk (disambiguation)

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

There was a recent requested move discussion at Talk:Stephen Kirk, which closed as moved on the basis that only two notable individuals with this name exist. The intention of the RM nomination was that the dab page would be replaced by a pair of hatnotes on the Stephen Kirk and Steve Kirk articles, each linking to the other and making this dabpage unnecessary. With the hatnotes in place, the dab page is not actually linked from anywhere. Since the RM closed, User:Boleyn has added two new entries to the dab page, "Stephen Kirk (songwriter) on Pray (Jessie Murph song)" and "Steve Kirk (illustrator) who worked with Cathy Camper". These are non-notable individuals who would not ever qualify for their own redirect or page and I see no need for us to retain a disambiguation page listing them. WP:DABMENTION instructs us to do this only if "a link to that article may be included if it would provide value to the reader", something, which is not the case for these individuals. Additionally there are links to Geoffrey Stephen Kirk, Kirk Stephens and Kirk Stevens, but again these are not plausible candidates for the "Stephen Kirk" name. — Amakuru (talk) 15:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for an entry on a dab page to be valid, it needs a 'Stephen Kirk' who has an article, who meets MOS:DABRL, or meets MOS:DABMENTION. This page has several, plus in the 'see also' section names that could be mistaken for 'Stephen Kirk'. Dabs are essentially indexes to WP, and show where a reader can find informaiton on a person. Therefore this page shows where you can find information on different people named Stephen Kirk. It is a valid dab page per the guidelines and the hatnotes to the dab have been restored - they would of course be deleted if the page was. I don't see anything policy-based in the argument for deletion, nothing referring to disambiguation guidelines. Boleyn (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Boleyn: Thanks for the comment. However, are the individuals mentioned on the page notable? If they aren't, then they don't qualify for WP:DABRL or WP:DABMENTION per my comments above. There's no value to a reader in forcing them to make an extra click to get from the handball player to the basketball player and vice versa, just to stare at the names of people who don't meet WP:GNG. The recent RM was conducted on the basis that there only two notable Stephen Kirks. If you think that isn't the case, then I'd be intrested to see the evidence, and maybe we should redlink them on the dab page. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 15:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:DABMENTION doesn't refer to notability, or whether the person would meet the requirements for a standalone article, just whether the person is mentioned in an article on Wikipedia. Boleyn (talk) 15:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Handball-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Neither non-notable Kirk is discussed in their linked articles, only name-dropped. We don't need a DAB for every single shared name ever appearing on WP.

JoelleJay (talk) 22:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Both Stephen Kirk (songwriter) and Steve Kirk (illustrator) have worked on more than a Jessie Murph song and Cathy Camper book, respectively, so those are not appropriate redirects. Moreover, DABMENTION requires that they be discussed in those articles, and they are merely mentioned there, not discussed. Finally, I don't think either of them meets DABRL because neither are notable as of now (although Stephen Kirk (songwriter) might become notable, given that he's worked with some high profile acts, like BTS). voorts (talk/contributions) 01:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. DABMENTION states "If a topic does not have an article of its own, but is discussed within another article". The two entries Boleyn added are mentioned in passing, not discussed. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Voorts and Clarityfiend. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 04:37, 8 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.

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. ✗plicit 00:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ronja Maltzahn

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

Does not meet WP:GNG. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 11:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, and Germany. Rajeev Gaur123 (talk) 11:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rajeev! I find the article to be necessary, since it clarifies the life of Ronja, that has been in the talks of youtubers, tv and printed media because of the issue mentioned in the article, about Cultural Appropriation. When people search for the character mentioned, Wikipedia is a source of clarity. \**|Fedesav|**/ Insomnio Rock! (talk) 11:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Source 7 Der Spiegel is fine, so is this [58] and another half dozen hits in DE media in Gnews. Oaktree b (talk) 14:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as per Oaktree b, secondly i think there are already very few women's articles on Wikipedia, so it should not be deleted, we have to take women forward. in October 2014, only 15.53% of English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 15:33, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:42, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Already clearly met GNG per sources in article. I added another one, so even more so now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Central and Adams (talk • contribs) 16:41, 2 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.

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 no consensus‎. Closed as no consensus after 3 weeks of discussions and relistings. Weak keep comments lean towards GNG but consensus is not clearly established. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lucy De Ville

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

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a band, and not found sources to add. It has been tagged as relying on primary sources since 2007. It has no footnotes and the two external links are an interview and the archived page for the band's website. I do not think it mets WP:NMUSIC. Tacyarg (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Tacyarg (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep passes WP:NBAND#6 with two (or more) notable members (albeit as singer-actors). They issued a studio album and an EP. I have supplied refs.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:05, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Ugh. I suspect that Shaidar cuebiyar will turn out to be correct, BUT WP:BAND6 refers to musicians, yet the articles for the two members refers to them as actresses. By some definitions, these folks are musicians; by others, they are not. On balance, I'll hold my nose, and vote for a marginal keep. Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 18:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 04:04, 9 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.

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 Draftify‎. Star Mississippi 15:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ramón Flores (trumpet player)

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

I couldn't establish that he meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG, and notability is not inherited. This is also an unref blp. I couldn't find a suitable WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Musician for To Sleep with Anger (according to this source), which got 17 nominations and won 6 of them. It technically does not contain a "Best Soundtrack" if such a category exists, but it did get nominated for Best Film and Best Feature, which includes everything.
I personally got to know about this man when watching the videos of the Yanni Live! The Concert Event. He's a notable solist in that concert. You can enjoy the concert here if you want and you will see him pop up every so often. It was a National Concert tour in the US with 54? concerts during that tour. The album with that concert on it reached no 86 in the Billboard 200 and no 1 on the Billboard "Top New Age Albums".

That makes him notable in WP:MUSICBIO for point 2, 4 and possibly 10. I am not sure that I have the time to edit the page in any reasonable time, but I hope that this helps show that he is indeed notable to be included on Wikipedia. Sumurai8 (talk) 18:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:09, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the three sources from the Spanish Wikipedia article should be examined if they haven't already. Left guide (talk) 07:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: I checked the Spanish article but only one of the sources might qualify for GNG, though reliability/independence is unclear. I also added some additional sources I found to satisfy WP:V but none were SIGOV (checked Newspapers.com, ProQuest and Google Books). Sumurai8 appears to be willing to work on it but needs more time and there may very well be better sources available, especially in Spanish. S0091 (talk) 18:26, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist for clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify for possible improvement as has potential in view of earlier comments, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:45, 23 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.

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 no consensus‎. Sandstein 08:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Friends of Harry

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

I couldn't find evidence that they meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG, or a good WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 18:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak keep - if the band was positively reviewed in Time Out (asserted but not cited), as well as touring internationally, there are likely other sources out there to push it through WP:N. Llajwa (talk) 17:22, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I found a couple newspaper sources. They certainly had at least two European tours and apparently were a hit in Switzerland and appeared on Czech television. S0091 (talk) 18:56, 14 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.

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 delete‎. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Gilliland

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

Biography of a musician and broadcaster, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for musicians or broadcasters. The strongest attempt at a notability claim is that he had a single peak #94 on the charts -- but that's not a high enough chart position to confer an "inherent" notability freebie in the absence of any WP:GNG-worthy sourcing, and while the song itself is a famous one his version was only a 14-years-later cover, not the definitive fame-making version, and simply having covered a song that was previously made famous by somebody else isn't a notability freebie either.
Other than that, however, this is strictly on the level of "Bill Gilliland is a person who existed", and five of the seven footnotes are primary sources and/or WordPress blogs that aren't support for notability at all -- while The Canadian Encyclopedia just briefly namechecks his existence a single time without being about him in any non-trivial sense, and RPM (which I had to search-in-document to actually find, because the footnote links to the entire issue but fails to name what specific article in the issue was being cited) just features him as the speaker making a corporate announcement about a Gordon Lightfoot compilation album, and thus isn't about Bill Gilliland either.
So we're sitting at zero for GNG-worthy coverage, because only two footnotes here are reliable or GNG-eligible sources but he isn't the subject of either of them, and nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 17:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 17:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment not enough for me to vote keep yet, but there's lasting, significant coverage in this book Mach61 (talk) 20:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Radio, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Well, the fish were biting in this confirmation [59], rest of Gnewspapers is for various politicians. Nothing about this person found. Oaktree b (talk) 20:34, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 01:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Oaktree b. Mach61 (talk) 19:20, 6 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 12:50, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pero Defformero

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

I may be missing something due to not reading Serbian, but I couldn't establish that they meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG, or that there is a good WP:ATD. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn (talk) 05:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:35, 29 January 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.

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

(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 [60], not extensive, but just enough. Also this in Teen Vogue, [61]. 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.

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 delete‎. BusterD (talk) 03:23, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Verbal ASE

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Most of the articles sources are not reliable (see Genius and Sportskeeda) and/or closely connected to the subject. Also seems to fall under WP:BLP1E, with the sole event potentially violating the WP:BLP guidelines. Jurta ^talk/_he/they 14:02, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Internet. Jurta ^talk/_he/they 14:02, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fuck nah i dont want this to be deleted, fuck u talkin about???? 104.10.143.25 (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: He has been the subject of many news, although this is short, it definitely helps sum up WP:SIGCOV with this which is in depth. I would absolutely lean towards weak keep after performing a full research. dxneo (talk) 13:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Refocus to being about the music video. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:28, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Refocus absolutely, this guy. MvA BoB (talk) 14:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Week keep, also the Verbal ASE#controversy section needs some cleanup. Jothefiredragon (talk) 06:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) Redirect to Hazbin_Hotel#Fandom, as it's more concise.Jo the fire dragon 🐉「talk」 04:05, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nah dawg, this isn't April Fool's bro. Qadri223 (talk) 07:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to either Hazbin_Hotel#Fandom or Synapson
Jo the fire dragon 🐉「talk」 11:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:27, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hazbin Hotel#Fandom or Synapson, per Jo the fire dragon. It's worth mentioning that one of the sources cited at Hazbin Hotel mentions that the link between the subject of the article & the controversy are tentative, and then reports the source as "per KnowYourMeme" (see WP:KYM). Most sources on the article appear to be from 2015 to 2018, and a more recent source from 2022 mentions him in passing. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 04:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am on my phone and unable to edit as needed - please take this as a delete rather than a redirect. No significant coverage or notability outside of the meme (which, according to the more reliable sources such as the Mary Sue) are still alleged. Phönedinger's jellyfish II (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I agree. It fails notability, and the only reason it's here is becouse of the recent meme/controversy. Also, I disagree with the notion too redirect him to Hazbin Hotel. He isn't officially associated with the show, and he made videos of dozens of cartoons, so why should he be linked to this specific cartoon. And yeah, yeah, meme, 50k on video, bad taste, and so on. Nobody will remember that in a month. I don't think redirect is needed.Artemis Andromeda (talk) 13:56, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ATA#CRYSTAL

Jo the fire dragon 🐉「talk」 14:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not everything needs a redirect to everything. If his article gets deleted, I don't see why we need to keep redirect becouse of a meme that's definitely not notable at all. Also, there's a difference between a "forgotten" celebrity, and a meme stoping being revelant after a week. And in this case I'm referring to the fact the meme won't be remembered, not the artist. Artemis Andromeda (talk) 17:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it as draft. Although it may have violated WP:BLP and WP:Notability (people), we could turn it into a draft article, then, the Peer review may conclude whether the article should be an article or failed at the first place in the draft process. Qadri223 Talk to me like a true conservative my contributions to the Wikipedia 04:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article are promo, interviews, name metions, and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. I don't think there is a good redirect target, but no strong objection if a consensus emerges for a target. // Timothy :: talk 14:16, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TimothyBlue, please see the first comment for "in depth" coverage. dxneo (talk) 18:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: [62] very interesting, but it is a video monologue from the subject. Fails WP:IS. I would like to keep this article, but I can't find sources and can't just vote keep because ILIKEIT.

[63] is very promotional for Hazbin Hotel. // Timothy :: talk 19:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: According to the article, Verbal ASE has held jobs, performed publicly, collaborated with other artists, been contracted for gigs, and runs a mid-tier YouTube channel. Your average successful artist, in other words. While making it in the art world is admirable, it is not notable. Verbal ASE deserves no article. Dieknon (talk) 01:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Does there exist a rule which indicates how many times an XFD can be relisted? - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉(talk|contributions) 06:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Run of the mill Youtuber who only received coverage because he spent too much money on a Hazbin Hotel video. WP:BLP1E. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 18:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This seems like it falls under WP:BLP1E. GrayStorm^{(Talk|Contributions)} 21:36, 18 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.

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 consensus met for GNG after the additon of new sources. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jo Mango

AfDs for this article:

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG, and there is no obvious WP:ATD. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can resolve it now. No consensus in 2005 AfD when standards for inclusion were significantly lower. Boleyn (talk) 10:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:54, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE unless someone is willing to do the work to establish notability - there’s nothing so far. Llajwa (talk) 16:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a bit of a look into this and think it will meet the 'Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself' notability criterion (at least). So I'll keep working on the article to bring it up to standard. Alarichall (talk) 09:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Review in the Glasgow Herald is fine, but that's all I can see that would count toward notability. I can't find anything beyond streaming sites or a bio at the Conservatoire of Scotland where this person works. Oaktree b (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so I've added references to coverage in national UK papers including The Sunday Times, Metro, and The Scotsman. I haven't done a comprehensive trawl of reporting, but I think that the article now shows that Jo Mango meets the notability criterion 'Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself'. Alarichall (talk) 11:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in view of the additional reliable sources coverage references added to the article such as the Sunday Times, The Scotsman, and The Herald (Scotland). Am exercising WP:AGF as urls are not provided for two of the three aforementioned sources, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:32, 11 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.

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 17:12, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Terra Diablo

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 20:23, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Scotland. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Their Allmusic biography is a good start. I found this review of their second album. A prog rock site has these two, admittedly more flimsy reviews. Tried searching Newspapers.com to no avail. Geschichte (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep based on the Daily Record review and AllMusic bio. Unfortunately Sea of Tranquility is considered an unreliable source. Haven't done a full search yet, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:52, 8 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.

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. ✗plicit 00:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Kings of Frog Island

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 15:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Searching the German music press only, I found reviews for the album II in Rockhard, Powermetal.de and Ox Fanzine as well as III in Metal.de. Furthermore we have Beatsperminute.com – every one I mentioned until now is reliable, as well as a miscellaneous assortment: [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] Geschichte (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kepp The Beatsperminute.com suggested above is a good source for expanding the article. I didnt look into others for I dont care. - Altenmann >talk 02:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Beatsperminute.com seems to have in-depth coverage.CSMention269 (talk) 05:26, 4 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.

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. Owen× ☎ 19:21, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barabàn

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 13:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Italy. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 14:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nom. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 14:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Strong delete~~, you probably should have proposed this article for deletion. Mach61 (talk) 15:31, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mach61 is that still the case with the sources linked in the comments below? Broc (talk) 16:56, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible for an artist to have notable works without being notable themselves, but the two sources Broc posted appear to show the band meeting NMUSIC. FWIW I remember finding absolutely nothing in my BEFORE search, hence the strong delete vote, but clearly others have been more fruitful in their searches. Consider my vote withdrawn. Mach61 (talk) 17:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't know anything about the Italian non-metal music press, but their work has been reviewed by at least two paper magazines. Geschichte (talk) 18:11, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per by previous post. No sign of a WP:BEFORE above. Geschichte (talk) 08:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Geschichte - they are regionally notable. Llajwa (talk) 21:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per above. Only regionally notable. A couple more sources: [69] [70] --Broc (talk) 16:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:34, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep enough sources seem to be present here. AryKun (talk) 09:07, 6 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.

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 17:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cazals (band)

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 08:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 09:30, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per reviews in Spin (magazine) (rather short), Allmusic.com (rather short) as well as [71] Time Off, [72] DIY (magazine), [73] Drowned in Sound, Spectrum Culture as well as the sigcov intro to this interview in Dazed (magazine). Geschichte (talk) 19:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - thanks to Geschichte for finding these reviews but they basically just register that an album was released, or else they say the music is bad. One ([74])begins "Oh. Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear oh dear." This was a band who released a record but did not attain notability. Llajwa (talk) 21:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A band doesn't have to be good to be notable Geschichte (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fair enough, but if it is neither good, nor well-known, nor influential, the fact that it received dismissive reviews does not seem to establish notability. Llajwa (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to have been somewhat well-known at the time, although it did not last for very long. Geschichte (talk) 21:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment For what it's worth, I can reiterate my belief that Llajwa's claims do not hold up in the slightest. What do others think of the multiple independent reviews? I'm not inclined to add them to the article if there's a chance of it getting deleted. Geschichte (talk) 16:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of the reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion by Geschichte that together shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per sources identified above, and also charting evidence from the Official Charts Company: [75]. ResonantDis_tortion 16:17, 9 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.

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 no consensus‎. and no objection to a speedy renom at a time when folks think there might be more participation. Star Mississippi 17:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Her Royal Harness

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

Fails WP:GNG. Could not find significant coverage in English language sources and I doubt any exists in Norwegian ones either. Keivan.f^Talk 09:23, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Norway. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 09:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. 6 hits in Norwegian. They are actual reviews, but woefully few. Geschichte (talk) 11:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any "significant" coverage in sources though? Maybe even the Norwegian ones? Because if none exists then it does not meet the notability criteria. Keivan.f^Talk 22:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:08, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Among the 6 hits, only 4 of them were reviews, but they were somewhat significant, so it may scrape by together with the sources that are already in the article. Geschichte (talk) 12:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 2 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.

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. Star Mississippi 16:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandrs Kublinskis

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 15:22, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Latvia. Owen× ☎ 15:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Can probably close one of these, appears to have been duplicate AfDs submitted Oaktree b (talk) 16:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has reliable sources coverage such as this and this. Also, the Latvian wikipedia article here states that he received two notable awards The Latvian Music Record of the Year Award and an honorary knighthood from the Latvian government. It also indicates he has an entry in the Latvian National Encyclopaedia although the link doesn't work, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:41, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep, on top of those sources above a quick search for Александр Кублинский shows there is decent coverage in Russian as well. Ostalgia (talk) 08:00, 2 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.

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 delete‎. Owen× ☎ 00:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Substereo

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

No indication of signifcance. Fails WP:NBAND. Refs are release news, social links and PR. scope_creep^Talk 18:26, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Hang on' tag added due to false claim of missing indication of significance.

Adherence to 'Criteria for musicians and ensembles' as noted on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music) as follows:

- Subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources from Reflist : [5](Newspaper), [6](blog), [7](newspaper), [12](Newspaper], [15](university article) etc..

- Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. As indicated by ref. [12], [2], [4], and [13] (itunes rock charts Denmark).

- Has won multiple awards for music videos a referenced.

- Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network. Ref [10]

Some of the independent links (news sources etc.) are dead but cannot be expected to be active after 10 years.

Notability is referenced in accordance with guidelines Tarajameson79 (talk) 12:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This article, and the editor above, confuses the accomplishments of the band with those of one member, Chris Angel Walker. The lengthy list of awards at the bottom of the article are all for films and were received by Walker in his other career as a video director. Most of those awards are themselves non-notable and do not qualify as "significant" awards per WP:ANYBIO, even if they were relevant for the band which they're not. As for the band, I can find nothing reliable and significant about them, and the article is dependent on press releases listing their presence at various events or their own promotional statements. Finally, per WP:CHART their placement in a regional iTunes chart does not count for notability. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The festivals mentioned are directed by Chris Angel Walker but the works are listed as Substereo.

The article, as mentioned above is not reliant on press releases, but rather news articles, interviews and blogs. The fact that these are is not grounds for exclusion. Tarajameson79 (talk) 14:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simply by looking at the names of the sources at the bottom of the article, only one (#17 from France) comes anywhere close to "news" and even that's a bit of a stretch. Also, per WP:UGC blogs are not reliable sources, and per WP:INTERVIEWS an interview should be independent and investigative. You also have a serious issue with dead links as sources, which accomplish nothing for the article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is inaccurate. Ugeavisen, Midsjællands avis, TV2 are examples of independent and legitimate news sources.

Articles from 2013 cannot be expected to be maintained as these are archived after a certain number of years. Tarajameson79 (talk) 14:58, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't verify a single one of these reference against WP:MUSICRS. Obviously many are social media, blog links stuff like that, which are not reliable sources. But, I couldn't find anything on social media to support the band. Usually if they are popular its imediately visible. This ref url for example, [76] has 70-odd views. Its not a valid source. These is nothing on the streaming sites. Sometimes you can look and you can guage how popular the band is and that give you approval to find more valid sources with the assumption there should be something there. But there is nothing there. It is non-notable. scope_creep^Talk 19:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of the listings on WP:MUSICRS are from Denmark. TV2 is one of the main national broadcasting stations. Verifying references against a list that only features a handful of countries is not comprehensive and extremely exclusive. Even excluding Denmark from that list is questionable. As mentioned on WP:MUSICRS itself: "This list is merely a collection of suggestions".

The references are valid, they are from actual newspapers that were published in physical form as well as in digital format. To claim that anything that is old should be deleted from wikipedia simply because those sources aren't available anymore would only allow currently popular projects to be featured as valid information.

Amount of views are also not a requirement, and that being said, the channel you mention has 143,382 views.

The claim that there is nothing on streaming sites is also inaccurate, as the references clearly show, the band has has a streaming platform presence since 2013. Not all ref sources are necessary, but all the necessary sources from newspapers and independent media are listed as required.

You cannot simply delete a project because it is not 'currently' popular. Tarajameson79 (talk) 22:07, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, the Substereo channel has 143,382 views, not the subtalks channel. Although views are still irrelevant to the topic matter.

Tarajameson79 (talk) 22:58, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarajameson79: The normal practice on WP:AFD is to post up WP:THREE references that prove the article is notable. Three references is the standard. If you have three good secondary references, please post them up. Hearsay and viewing numbers don't count here, unless its backed backed by a valid reference. scope_creep^Talk 07:47, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I question why this keeps getting relisted, as there is only one true vote (by me) and that is to delete, and the article's supporter has made comments to the contrary but the nominator has debunked them quite convincingly with policy-based rebuttals. Articles are often soft-deleted for less than this. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why its been relisted either. There is nothing here. scope_creep^Talk 16:33, 8 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.

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 no consensus‎. (non-admin closure) TarnishedPath^talk 15:34, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dai Paterson

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO, WP:ENT or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Boleyn (talk) 18:49, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Satisfies NACTOR with main roles in Dreams for Life and Happy New [77], the latter of which had reviews in Agenda, A3 and The Herald Sun in addition to the linked Age article already in the refs. And a significant role in Dog's Head Bay (as David Paterson). Also a significant role in God, the Devil and the True History of Mankind with short reviews in The Age and Herald Sun but that might not reach the bar of notability without more coverage being available. He was also a big bad in the second series of Beastmaster but online coverage of that series is severely lacking. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per duffbeerforme above Llajwa (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BEFORE searching for the subject name showed nothing from IRS with SIGCOV, a review and search for Dreams for Life which seems to be their most significant role, turns up no SIGCOV for the individual. BLPs require strong sourcing, and notability is not inherited.

The only source duffbeerforme provides [78] is a database record of an event, their rationale fails per NOTINHERITED. Llajwa is just a me too vote. If WP:THREE sources are added to the article that meet WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth, ping me. // Timothy :: talk 02:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional analysis of the available reference material would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of Tim's boilerplate vote is about the contents of BLP, not their existence. NACTOR is part of NBIO so a pass of the former is not a fail of the latter. Tim dismisses the above link I provided as merely a database record but fails to look at what is contained in the record

Review: Bill Perrett, Agenda, 13 June 2004, 23

Review: Helen Thomson, A3, 8 June 2004, 8

Review: Kate Herbert, The Herald Sun, 16 June 2004, 62

When combined with the also mentioned Age article it shows that this production is notable and as Mr. Paterson has a significant role in the production it counts toward NACTOR section about significant roles in notable production. This is not a NOTINHERITED failure but a direct application of the relevant SNG.

A look at the article for Dreams for Life (which if all else had been found wanting would be a good alternative to deletion target so no deletion would be required) shows that it too is notable and that Mr. Paterson has a significant role (as acknowledged above by Tim above). So there is another role that directly addresses that same NACTOR criteria. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Notability is not inherited. Source eval:

Comments	Source
Database record, no info except photo	1. "David Paterson". United Agents.
Official video on Youtube, fails WP:IS, no WP:SIGCOV about the subject	2. ^ "Silverchair - Emotion Sickness (Official Video)". YouTube. 28 September 2012. Archived from the original on 19 December 2021.
Official video on Youtube, fails WP:IS, no WP:SIGCOV about the subject	3. ^ The chicken or the egg?
	From above
Database record for event, no info about subject, has links to other subjects, notability is not inherited	https://www.ausstage.edu.au/pages/event/65671

BLPs require strong sourcing, not just editor opinions. // Timothy :: talk 03:05, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Oops, sorry, forgot that it has been confirmed at Deletion Review that editors can ignore the existence of any relevant source that exists but is not currently refbombed into the page. That and they can ignore any relevant notability policy if it doesn't suit their arguments. Oh, and your source review sucks, maybe check it again. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:20, 13 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.

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 merge‎ to The Durutti Column. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Rainford

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

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this. Possible WP:ATD is redirect or merge/redirect to Factory Records, but it may unbalance that article. Boleyn (talk) 18:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to The Durutti Column. Seeing as what little about the band has come up mentions how obscure it is, I think we can safely consider the odds of an individual member being notable rather dismal. Mach61 (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I suspect he is probably a keep based on his role as producer of two Nico albums and engineer of a third. I'd tread lightly, in any event. Carrite (talk) 03:23, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:07, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per Carrite’s argument above. Llajwa (talk) 18:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to The Durutti Column. Both the article content and the target will be improved by the merge. As a stand alone BLP, fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing. // Timothy :: talk 02:49, 9 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.

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 no consensus‎. WP:NPASR applies. ✗plicit 11:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Banjax

AfDs for this article:

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

They don't appear to meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. There is some coverage, but I am not sure it is significant enough. It was found non-notable and deleted at AfD in 2006, when our standards for inclusion were considerably lower. Boleyn (talk) 09:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Seems to have WP:THREE even though they are not Internet accessible. An interesting group, and the information may not be accessible elsewhere. Llajwa (talk) 14:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:07, 31 January 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.

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Harley Poe does not appear to make sense as an ATD as band members went on to other blue-linked bands, but editors may create one at their discetion. Star Mississippi 02:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calibretto 13

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

Unsourced since 2013 and I can't find enough significant coverage that would show they need their own article. The only point in their favour (as far as I can tell, anyway) is that they released albums on Tooth & Nail Records, a significant indie label, but I'm not sure that's enough. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 06:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Indiana. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 06:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment that I forgot to include in my original message: if the consensus is that they shouldn't have their own article, it might be best to redirect to Harley Poe? Not sure though. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 06:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see know cause for deletion of the article. A number of bands, roughly the same size from Tooth and Nail Records have their own Wikipedia pages. While there are not a lot of sources available, I think the deletion of the page would be a further loss of information. Theo1858 (talk) 16:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not convinced that they're notable enough considering the lack of coverage - Discogs doesn't convey notability in the slightest (and is generally considered an unreliable source due to being user-generated), Concert Archives is at least partially user-generated and doesn't require artists listed to be notable, and the Harley Poe review is only a passing mention. There is the one Punk News review of Dead By Dawn, but I don't think that's enough to convince me. We'll see what others say, I guess. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 11:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At this point I would say Calibretto meets Notability section 1 criterion, with multiple published album reviews in newspapers, print magazines, and punk zines.

They also meet criterion section 5, with two full length albums and 1 EP released on Tooth and Nail Records (A notable independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable, and a significant impact within a specific music genre (alternative Christian punk and hardcore scene)

The band's music was also featured in multiple published works including the Stephen Baldwin produced documentary "Livin It" and the WB tv show "What's New, Scooby Doo?". Theo1858 (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 18:05, 31 January 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.

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) 04:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Outcast Band

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

They exist, but I couldn't establish that they meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it. Boleyn (talk) 16:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:36, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No real claim to notability. Llajwa (talk) 20:24, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have just seen this AfD. Can I request another relist please, to give me time to look for sources? There is RS coverage here stating significance:[79]. ResonantDis_tortion 06:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep After digging-up several more sources (including both independent coverage and album reviews) I have added these citations to the article, and also cleaned up the text and the general tone. There is now sufficient independent WP:RS coverage that the subject has WP:V evidence to meet WP:NMUSIC#7, most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city, and also the Outcast Band should meet WP:NMUSIC#1, Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. It should also be noted that the band was very active in the early 1990s, and we can therefore presume there is high likelihood of offline coverage. ResonantDis_tortion 23:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looked around, seems like a non notable local band Timber of Neutrality (talk) 05:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you look around? Geschichte (talk) 11:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep after ResonantDistortion's work. Geschichte (talk) 11:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to consider ResonantDistortion's submission.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep after ResonantDistortion's additions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:32, 7 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.

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 no consensus‎. In AfD for three weeks and two relists. No consensus or helpful comments. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

El Grupo Sexo

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

Appears to be a non-notable band that does not meet relevant notability guidelines (WP:BAND). Hey man im josh (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not taking a position here. LA Times archive shows up a few sources that look promising. [80] [81] [82] There may be more I missed in WPL. An argument could be made for NBAND#5 due to Doctor Dream Records' 15-year history and roster, but admittedly this is very weak. Schminnte^{[talk to me]} 17:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify - the page was recently created - it has zero RS support for notability, but sources are likely out there for the interested editors to find. Llajwa (talk) 20:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion around the extent that this article's subject is covered by extant sources would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:19, 31 January 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.

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 00:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solemn Novena

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

Doesn't meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 19:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Northern Ireland. Owen× ☎ 19:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it has been previously PROD'd (via summary).

Logs: 2006-09 ✗ CSD A7

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No claim to notability. Llajwa (talk) 03:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:29, 30 January 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.

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 no consensus‎. Star Mississippi 01:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Odd Crew

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

Barely referenced article and the references appear to all be wikis, facebook pages, or the band's own website. No reliable secondary sources to illustrate they meet WP:BAND. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Bulgaria. Shellwood (talk) 14:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Encyclopedia Mettalum used as sourcing is not a RS. I can't find mentions of this group online in RS (or in much of anything really. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Found no evidence of notability. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark These Words as to why no AtD. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 18:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More references added. Xray321 (talk) 10:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't reliable sources. I had to remove some for being WP:USERGENERATED, WP:DISCOGS and WP:IMDB. The remaining appear to be random blogs that simply repeat press releases. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there is independent coverage available online including news and reviews with significant coverage - see for example:

This is specialist music genre, and these are specialist online magazines. Some of these sources do appear fairly reliable - but input from editors with greater knowledge of the sources could be beneficial. ResonantDis_tortion 16:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For evaluation of the sources provided above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: ResonantDistortion: When posting links, please omit any that are clearly promotional, particularly when they use the same press release.
- Prog Rock Journal, Ghost Cult Mag, Metal Heads Forever Magazine, RAMzine: Mostly PR copy[83]
- Velvet Thunder: Possibly neutral and independent, but the website has no editor credits, code of conduct information, only has a single email POC, and PR copy is posted under the "News" category without being labelled as such.
- Radio Tangra: Author appears to be Bulgarian musician Stefan "Stiff" Yordanov, who was in turn of the millennium bands Insmouth and Redrum. Expert, and possibly neutral/independent, but the site has only an advertising POC, and no editorial policy or code of conduct.
- Devolution Magazine: The reviewer (Jo Wright) appears to have performed 100+ reviews for the magazine, also has a longer interview article with the band. Website has editor listed, but not an editorial policy or code of conduct. "Work With Us" section states "We are always on the look out for brands looking to advertise, contributors, stockists and affiliates/partners to work with on exciting opportunities" - unclear as to what disclosure is provided.
- rockfreaks.net: Looks reliable[84]. AZ is former reviewer Bulgarian Alexander Zafirov - large number of reviews[85]
- metal.de: Looks reliable. Reviewer is a regular.[86][87]
There's at least a marginal level of coverage in English Language sources, this is a band that has survived for 20 years under two names, and it is all but certain that there'd be more coverage in Bulgaria and probably elsewhere given their touring[88] (the rollingstone.bg article hasn't been archived, and it's tricky to tell what sources in the bg-wiki article are reliable). But the current article quality is terrible, and appears to have had significant connected contributions . I'm somewhere between a Weak Keep if someone cleans it up properly, and a Draftify/WP:TNT delete if not (yes, WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP given consideration). ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 11:21, 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.

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 no consensus‎. WP:NPASR applies. ✗plicit 12:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vinh Khuat

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

Sources don't show how this person is notable. ¹⁴¹ Pr {contribs} 13:28, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Vietnam, and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 14:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The sources in the article might not show notability, but a Google search brings up a ton of results in Vietnamese media. Unfortunately, I do not speak Vietnamese so I cannot assess the reliability of those sources, but it's sufficient to presume multiple reliable secondary exist, thus fulfilling the notability criteria. [89] [90] [91] [92] @Praseodymium-141: have you checked the sources in the Vietnamese page ? --Broc (talk) 13:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:20, 29 January 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.

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. Daniel (talk) 22:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto McCausland Dieppa

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

A lot of WP:REFSPAM, and it seems like WP:COI. A lot of the sources are very questionable, being WP:SELFPUB or defunct. Apart from a few musical profiles, I can't find much online either that meets WP:GNG. TLA (talk) 21:03, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG. Obviously this need cleanup but there is coverage to meet WP:BASIC. [93], [94], [95] in El Heraldo (Colombia). 200.107.96.222 (talk) 17:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:COMPOSER and WP:MUSICBIO. Article is clearly a mess and excessively promotional, but not a reason to delete. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per CurryTime. Meets GNG amd coverage. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:28, 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.

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

References

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Bands and musicians==
 <!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
+{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blessed Be This Nightmare}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rufai Waris}}
 {{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Christopher_Brown_(British_composer)}}

Revision as of 20:33, 4 February 2024

Bands and musicians

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Categories

References