Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dax johnson: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 06:21, 8 February 2022

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. Kevin (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dax johnson

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

Nonnotable local musician, only a single article in a local paper as a reference. Contested prod. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete I don't see any indication of notability. But a preliminary search shows listing on Rhapsody and lastfm. I don't think that designates notability, but it does suggest something. On the other hand, there are just myspace, blog, and primary source pages that I can find otherwise. Would be convinced otherwise if someone can find some other references. Shadowjams (talk) 07:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also comes up as an NME artist: http://www.nme.com/artists/dax-johnson as well as receiving extremely high praise from David Nevue (a wikipedia worthy musician who felt "honoured" to perform with Dax. http://davidnevue.blogspot.com/2005/11/in-memory-of-dax-johnson.html Xervish Flydd (talk) 02:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 03:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No evidence of sufficient notability. -RobertMel (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2010 (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.

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 :<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Tim Song|Tim Song]] ([[User talk:Tim Song|talk]]) 03:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
 *'''Delete''' - No evidence of sufficient notability. -[[User:RobertMel|RobertMel]] ([[User talk:RobertMel|talk]]) 19:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
-:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>