Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Betan

Peter Betan

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Peter Betan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Appears to be a long-running autobiography created and maintained for years by Peter Betan himself or someone closely related. Several claims lack sources, and the only legitimate independent coverage appearing in the article are two publications local to Miami, where the subject lives. The name-dropping of opening acts is reminiscent of the example given in WP:GARAGE. There is no indication that the subject meets any of the criteria in WP:MUSICBIO.

This article is also being discussed at Wikipedia:Help desk#Help needed to authenticate further the artist / musician/ composer/ guitarist "Peter Betan" article. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:MUSICBIO. Theroadislong (talk) 21:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

  Umm, those two links are the same. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:29, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes I meant to add WP:GNG not WP:musicbio!. Theroadislong (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

• Comment - If the article is deleted, please also delete the redirect Betan, Peter and consider whether Betan should be unlinked or removed from the Music of Miami article. GoingBatty (talk) 22:44, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

  @GoingBatty: An admin deleting an article generally looks at "what links here" and cleans up anything that needs cleaning up. Not always (I've been known to forget to do this), but generally that's the process. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:19, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

• Delete - fails WP:NMUSIC and the article has far too many unsourced/weakly-sourced claims to be allowed to continue in its present state. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
• Delete - Clearly a self-promotional article. He has a few brief mentions in local Miami media, though the sources used in the article for his supposed achievements are dead or off-topic. Opening for someone famous at a one-off show is not notable because touring acts routinely invite someone local to open so they can save on travel costs. Otherwise this musician is only visible in self-created music directories and streaming sites, with none of the significant coverage that is necessary here. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 02:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
• Delete - Should have been done twelve years ago. Better late than never. -Arch dude (talk) 05:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
• Delete I am unable to find independent, in depth coverage to establish musical or general notability. Star Mississippi 17:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

• This is Betinfo the contributor(s) of the Article mentioned: "Peter Betan" Yes, there is a COI in the article. The contributor and the subject of the article are one of the same. In good faith, this article which has been in Wikipedia for 12 years has merit. Admittedly so, it has been somewhat neglected over the years. Links, citations, verifiable sources die and it is up to the contributors and editors to replace the dead links with new active ones to maintain a current, factual and cohesive status for the reader of the articles. The contributor / subject of the article is not well versed in using the tools that wikipedia edit pages provide to authenticate a fact or credential to the subject. We apologize for not using the tools correctly which now the ramifications of being poorly versed with the documentation / verification tools have surfaced into possible deletion and accusations of being non-factual, or fabricated information.
• We are pretty sure the "Peter Betan" article will be deleted, but please let me assure that the article was never motivated by self promotion. The subject of the article has had plenty of promotion, press releases, local TV / Radio appearances, performances in all venues and notoriety on the web for decades, and has been a professional original artist / performer for over 30 years noted by his web presence and artistic cultural contributions to the area where he resides, performs and records. Some of the many opening act credentials that the subject of the article has were not mentioned because there was no obtainable web based verification for them, but the concert openings mentioned in the article are verifiable ( we assumed linking a mentioning of the concert openers in a popular news publication would suffice) The article "Peter Betan" was never intended to be a vehicle of self promotion or for inducement to selling music product or anything else related to self promotion. It was intended for providing knowledge, career and historical information coupled with verifiable credentials and music catalog information strictly pertaining to the subject of the article. The subject of the article already has had decades of regional notable notoriety as an independent original artist before the article was created. Web links and citations go dead over the years and some of the factual information in these articles loose their verification. The article "Peter Betan" was created with the utmost objectivity and not motivated by self promotion and absolutely nothing is fabricated. When an artist is rich and famous Wikipedia will have no problem accepting articles about these respective artists, and that is all well, good and agreed. With all due respect,I believe Wikipedia could use some improvement in the category of articles pertaining to independent artists. There are many who are true creative professionals and who merit articles about them and have contributed artistically to our culture, we just never hear about them or looked over. Wikipedia is a web based encyclopedia and should never be a selective one. We don't believe it is. If Wikipedia decides to delete the article "Peter Betan" we will accept the decision ad bare no ill will. The contributor(s) and subject of the article want to thank Wikipedia for providing this article to interested readers for 12 years. Lastly and again, We apologize with regard the COI and we vehemently state that the article "Peter Betan" was NOT created for the purpose of self promotion, but for solely providing knowledge, historical, career information coupled with the subjects published music catalog, achievements and credentials. Sincerely and with much thanks - Betinfo (talk) 19:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

was NOT created for the purpose of... promotion, but for solely providing knowledge, historical, career information coupled with the subjects published music catalog, achievements and credentials is oxymoronic on its face and what most promoters say when they're told their article's promotional. My bigger concern is the unsourced claims. You're damned lucky this didn't mutate into another Seigenthaler. We require these sources for a reason, and those claims existing is a disservice to him, Wikipedia readers, his fans, and us editors who're forced to either bring the article into compliance or delete it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 20:31, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

• Delete Can't find any significant secondary coverage, the sources in the article are mostly dead links which doesn't help. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

RECONSIDER: The article "Peter Betan" has been a part of wikipedia knowledge for 12 years. This article has merit. When first created the wikipedia editors and users were very supportive and assisted thru the process of publishing, and bringing the article to a level of compliance. Wikipedia published the article legitimately 12 years ago. We continue to stand our ground regarding the article "Peter Betan" It is NOT an article for promotion and was never intended to be. It is an article which provides solely knowledge, historical / career information coupled with discography and achievement credentials of the articles subject. Jeske Couriani has prejudiced his perspective by impulsive judgement, false accusations of fabrication and making a very poor comparison of the "Peter Betan" article to that of the "Seigenthal" article. And it is my opinion that he has no, or offered any proof to his unfounded claim when he stated: "That's what promoters do when they're told they are promoters" This is only a notion and a poorly preconceived opinion. We are NOT promoters. In our previous comment on this page we explained that claims, links and sources expire, lapse and die out. We did not use the tools to replace these claims for updated ones properly and correctly hence, the current situation of nomination to delete the article "Peter Betan" We will not be doing any further editing or additions to the article "Peter Betan" and are asking for help from wikipedia to further improve the authenticity of this article as well as bringing it to the level of compliance if wikipedia decides not to delete it. Either way, we will accept the decision of deletion with no ill will. With much thanks - Betinfo