Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians

Shortcuts

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 delete‎. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:20, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jacques le Roux

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

Howdy!

I'm honestly making this submission with something of a heavy heart, as I've prolly put in a few collective days of work into tryin' to source and improve this article. It survived two attempts at speedy deletion and a proposed deletion on the basis of the subject's promisin' international career. However, after searching high and low, from JSTOR to Naxos to, well, Google, I've dug up hardly anything at all about Mr. le Roux, let alone notable coverage. While he's no doubt got an enviable career, it doesn't seem to me that this performer meets the notability requirements for a Wikipedia article. But of course, I'm more than happy to be corrected!

Thanks! ~Judy _{(call it in!)} 18:59, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, Theatre, and South Africa. ~Judy _{(call it in!)} 18:59, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't see any notable productions that he has performed in, except for possibly this: "In 2013, he sang in the world premiere of the Philip Glass opera The Lost, at the opening of the Linz opera house." Glass is an important composer, and singing a role in the premiere of one of his operas (though a very obscure one) is something, but it was not a long run, and the rest of his career seems to be in non-notable productions. So far, I'd say Delete, unless someone finds something major. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:55, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is all I can find [1], different person. Nothing for this person found. Oaktree b (talk) 22:50, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:22, 14 December 2023 (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. Daniel (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmet Enes

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

Fails WP:GNG. Deleted in trwiki also. Not notable. Kadı Message 17:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Turkey. Kadı Message 17:05, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There is WP:CIRCULAR as well. Aintabli (talk) 21:52, 10 December 2023 (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. Daniel (talk) 10:38, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zedned

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

The subject is non-notable. The topic has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Further, when considering fulfilment of WP:NBAND criteria, there is no evidence per my WP:BEFORE that any are met. WP:BADCHARTS applies to the claim that the band has charted. —Alalch E. 06:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. —Alalch E. 06:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agreed with the nominator; I am unable to find anything proving notability, whether via google searches or via the article references. ResonantDis_tortion 12:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I couldn't fid anything that might convey notability. Very promotional in tone. Fails WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Found nothing additional myself. Also BLARed Zedned (album) on the same grounds just now. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 17:38, 12 December 2023 (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. clpo13_(talk) 19:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Baysted

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

Subjects fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Just another run-of-the-mill video game employee lacking in notability and failing to assert notability. As for reliable sources, he only has one outside this article, but that does not assert notability as well. Article has been created by the subject, a clear-cut COI case. Despite being PROD deleted in 2009, this article has since been recreated in 2011; despite this, issues still remains unaddressed since 2020.

This subject's bio is unsourced, nothing is except credits for his work consisting of those from official websites and IMDB, which is neither a reliable source. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Video games, and United Kingdom. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:MUSICBIO applies. In this short biography it states that Baysted has been nominated for a number of awards - at least some of which are notable including the Golden Reels. There is potential for meeting WP:MUSICBIO#8. ResonantDis_tortion 12:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, it's best to 'clean' out that article and start again by a 3rd party editor from scratch rather than it be left as some WP:COI vanity edit. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Articles for Deletion is not cleanup. Article is now stubbed. ResonantDis_tortion 16:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep multiple nominations for notable awards (WP:MUSICBIO#8); segment on national radio (WP:MUSICBIO#12); multiple secondary coverage in specialist zines (WP:MUSICBIO#1); music created for multiple notable works (WP:MUSICBIO#10). Article has been updated to demonstrate all this, and has been cleared up of non-RS. ResonantDis_tortion 11:37, 11 December 2023 (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} 23:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The current sourcing is not good. The Sound Architect and M Magazine are mostly interviews (primary sources). The "Contributors" source is of course primary, as is the University of Chichester page. I am therefore instating the {{primarysources}} tag. Behind the Audio leans towards acceptable whereas BBC Radio 3 seems to confirm WP:MUSICBIO#12. Geschichte (talk) 11:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (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 (weakly). Daniel (talk) 00:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kobla Ladzekpo

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

At present, the article doesn't indicate that Kobla Ladzekpo meets NBIO, [WP:NMUSIC

Comment: This mention in the New York Times [2] and this [3] seem to hint at notability, I'll keep looking. Oaktree b (talk) 18:02, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, Dance, Ghana, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — There are sources, such as this Los Angeles Times, that are significant enough for the subject to meet WP:GNG. Shoerack (talk) 09:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep just enough with the sources above. Oaktree b (talk) 20:13, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Is notable, but poorly. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 16:35, 18 December 2023 (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} 23:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Tudor

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

Subjects fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Just another run-of-the-mill video game employee lacking in notability that fails to assert notability besides being a non-notable musician. As for reliable sources, one source is through a paywall and is to promote a video game he was involved in, which I doubt highly asserts notability. The other is an announcement of his position as a director. The article has been created by COI editor who has since been banned for sock-puppetry, who since continues to ban-evade as an IP user. This has been dePRODded and recreated despite a successful PROD nomination in 2010 but was recreated in 2011; despite this, issues still remains unaddressed since 2017. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:37, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:37, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural Comment - The action above does not formally nominate Stephen Baysted for deletion, as there is no notice at the top of his article. Trying to tie nominations together just because they're both video game guys is unnecessary and awkward. Simply create an entire new AfD for Baysted if you think it's appropriate. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this advice, done it since. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if anyone has a response to this nomination. Already PROD'd so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No significant coverage about Tudor as a subject. That said, he has a public-facing development role and has been interviewed widely in primary sources covering his work as the creative director of the Project Cars series (e.g. [4][5][6][7][8]) and co-penned an article on game design [9]. So he may not quite be a run of the mill video game employee, but it's clear he lacks the sort of coverage that warrants his inclusion as an independent article. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 11:32, 14 December 2023 (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 22:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Peninsula Youth Orchestra, Newport News,VA

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

Does not seem to meet notability requirements (all four links in the article are dead). In addition, no major edits to the article have been made since 2018 Saltyeg (talk) 05:37, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:20, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just curious. Saltyeg, that you nominated this article for deletion with your first edit with this account. Very unusual that you would even know about AFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have been lurking for around three months here, reading the Teahouse and WP policies. I decided to make a new account because my old one had my full name on it which I am no longer interested in sharing online. Saltyeg (talk) 04:07, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: on the fence here; they seemingly have a lot of magazine/newspaper coverage, but it all seems to be mostly brief mentions. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 15:52, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: firstly, neither dead links nor lack of major recent edits constitute valid grounds for deletion. But from the more important sourcing standpoint, there's this mid-1970s music journal article published by the American String Teachers Association at the University of Michigan and written by an editor from the Dallas Independent School District, this 2022 article from The Daily Press republished by Yahoo! Finance, this interview of the orchestra's parent organization (Soundscapes) by a Virginian arm of NPR with some coverage of the orchestra, this 2021 audition announcement in a local publication, and this recent local news announcing their holiday concert. Left guide (talk) 02:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:23, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:58, 20 December 2023 (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!} 07:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ratata (band)

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

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 07:18, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:05, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep: Passes WP:NMUSICIAN "Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country." and "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:35, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Important band in the history of modern Swedish music. Among the sources are an hour-long documentary produced by the national television company. No explanation why the band would lack notability. A bit perplexed by the first attempt to reduce a fairly ambitious article from 2014 to a redirect with no prior discussion. /Julle (talk) 01:18, 6 December 2023 (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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TimeShard

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the general and band-specific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. UtherSRG (talk) 11:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: generally couldn't find very many sources on them. has the AllMusic bio and ratings for their two albums, but not much else. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 22:14, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the newly-found sources. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 00:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have a strong suspicion that this dance music act should be presumed notable. The relative lack of available sources is more likely due to their prominence in the 1980s/1990s, with published articles not making it through to the internet age. At minimum TimeShard appears to meet:

WP:NBAND#12 - substantial segment on a national radio broadcast (they had a session on BBC Radio 1 in 1994).
WP:creative#2 - innovative in the dance music scene as one of the first live dance music acts.

Keep I have added sources to the article which are sufficiently reliable for both of these to meet WP:V, including the allmusic bio and Resident Advisor coverage, which both contribute to WP:GNG. I have also added a 1994 gig review in Melody Maker [10], a 1994 interview in The Mix [11], and a 1994 feature in Generator Magazine [12]. I will continue to look for further sourcing, but these multiple sources are now supporting notability per WP:NBAND#1. ResonantDis_tortion 23:23, 5 December 2023 (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. I'm closing this as Keep because that is the consensus but this article needs a lot of work. This closure isn't an endorsement of the current article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:39, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Moonies

AfDs for this article:

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

Cites no sources at all, could not find any to establish notability DirtyHarry991 (talk) 06:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and England. DirtyHarry991 (talk) 06:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on procedural lines, at the least - the article cites half a dozen press pieces about the band, though they are improperly formatted and contain overly florid quotes that should be trimmed per WP:PROMO. So the nominating rationale is incorrect on its face. The article certainly needs cleanup (and has for many years), but that also is not a valid reason for deletion. Chubbles (talk) 08:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No footnotes but plenty of suitable sources. Thincat (talk) 10:08, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If kept, it should be renamed to The Moonies (band) and The Moonies redirected to Unification Church. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:29, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: obviously needs some work to fix the improperly formatted citations, but the article is otherwise fine and obviously notable. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 19:55, 5 December 2023 (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 03:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Thaler

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

Not seeing anything that satisfies WP:MUSICIAN. The article states "Many of his personal & professional references are often citations of other self-generated web-pages, & content." Clarityfiend (talk) 13:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Skynxnex (talk) 16:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:22, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: bad sourcing, individual isn't notable, ~~and this article reads more like a personal attack than something encyclopedic.~~ Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 20:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~striked for now per Doomsdayer520's comment.~~ Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 20:00, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
unstriked per my reply to Doomsdayer520. article still feels rather promotional to me, and the page creator's fairly obvious connection to the subject doesn't particularly help in my eyes. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 22:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clear vandalism by some disgruntled disreputable third-party of unknown origin, and who wishes to hide in the shadows. This is cancel-culture garbage in the worst of ways.

The individual who made the Dec 1 change(s) to this page did not even provide a Wiki account, and flagrantly disregarded many publicly available third-party sources lauding and describing Mr. Thaler's continuing work, credentials, and music industry experience. AllMusic, Discogs, Modern Drummer Magazine, Sticks 'n Skins (hard cover book), L'est Republican newspaper, Sabian, The Sound Collective NYC, SAE Institute, The Future Music Forum, Sync Summit, Monday Magazine, Stuff, ACast, CBC, Fountain.fm, Urban Music Scene, etc etc etc. There are such a large number of articles dating back to the 90's/2000's available for review that it is comical how inappropriate this vandalism is, or that Wiki does nothing to eject the perpetrator. Further, the edits posted purposely and aggressively defamed Mr. Thaler and others, even in "colloquial" language and terminology, is this common practice at Wiki to allow this? This article, as you can see, remained on Wiki for at least 10 years without any incident or demonization, only to be attacked multiple times beginning during Covid. This is reprehensible. HarleyMarcos (talk) 04:57, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The nomination and first vote above appear to be reactions to some vandalism in the article, committed by an anonymous user on December 1 and later reverted. The obvious personal attacks in the December 1 version were somehow interpreted as poor article quality and non-notability, which I find to be a curious leap in logic. In the article history, you can see that before and after that date we have a pretty typical biography, perhaps with questionable notability but without any bad-faith shenanigans. Mr. Thaler is indeed a known instructional drummer and producer though I'm undecided on notability for the time being. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:45, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll strike my vote for now; when I saw this article the first time I was extremely exhausted and it slipped my mind to check the page history. thanks for letting me know. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 19:59, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Doomsdayer520: I'm going to add though, I still feel as if Thaler isn't notable, and the page creator (who replied to this AfD with a long rant about cancel culture) does seem to have a clear personal connection to the subject; this is the singular and only page this user has created, a good portion of their edits have been adding Thaler to other pages, and the only photos they have uploaded to Commons are both only of Thaler and literally the only pictures of Thaler on Commons at all. I still kind of feel like this article is more promotional than encyclopedic, and I have doubts about his notability minus his alleged production on other albums. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 20:16, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Nothing notable, no sources that discuss him at length. Sourcing used now is pulling at straws and this is overly wordy, when it doesn't really say much. It's an extended CV. Oaktree b (talk) 17:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning delete. This is a professional profile, I can't see a reasonable path towards what we have here meeting NPOV without stubifying, which is probably not worth it given other editors' assessments of notability. No prejudice towards recreation of a neutral article if notability is established. —siro χ o 19:27, 11 December 2023 (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 05:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Specdo

AfDs for this article:

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

This article has previously been deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Specdo). At present, notability guidelines likely have not been met given that the sources seem to be primary. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: article feels rather promotional and the sourcing is fairly poor; sources used in the article seem to be literally the only sources that exist on him. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 14:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 16:33, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion due to previous AfDs
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No variety in sources. I agree with user Darling about the article being promotional only. killer bee  05:19, 11 December 2023 (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. Daniel (talk) 22:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Reeths-Puffer Marching Band

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

High school marching bands are not notable and this appears to be no exception with routine local and non-independent or irrelevant sources. Bensci54 and I both redirected the page to be reverted by the creator. Both WikiOriginal-9 and Voorts declined AFD submission, not sure why Timtrent approved it in such a self-promotional and unencylopedically written/sourced form. Reywas92^Talk 22:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Michigan. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: One has to love nominations with a bit of snark in them 😈. I have a firm personal policy of steadfast neutrality at articles I accepted at AFC. I follow the guidance that a draft must, in my view, have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. This is an immediate deletion process and I await the community's view. If I was mistaken then I will learn from it If I was not then you will learn from it, But, whatever transpires, I really think you might learn not to be snarky when you nominate something for deletion. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really trying to be snarky, but I don't think there's a single other high school marching band article on Wikipedia for good reason. This is of interest only to participants and clearly fails WP:CLUB and the few independent sources fail WP:AUD. Even without an article for Reeths-Puffer High School, individual student groups at scondary schools are not something we need standalone pages for and virtually never pass AFD. Reywas92^Talk 00:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that this one is unlikely to pass, too. But that is what AfD is for, and we shall still see what happens. If you weren't trying then snark came naturally. You were not lacking in civility, not exactly, but you get an A+ from me for what must be natural snarkiness. It is the article that you are nominating, not the reviewer. I'm perfectly content to have a mistake demonstrated to me, but I do prefer it to be demonstrated with no edge to the demonstration. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As I noted in declining this at AfC, the only RS providing SIGCOV is the MLive article. I have been unable to find additional RSes via TWL or Google. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As someone deeply invested in the marching arts, from drum corps to winter guard, I can say for certain that no high school marching band in the world is notable. There is not enough coverage to sustain a completely independent page from the parent article. I oppose a redirect. Why? I Ask (talk) 23:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: poor-quality promotional article with bad sourcing; band itself is not notable, and the search term seems rather unlikely to me. page creator seems obviously connected to the subject. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 14:36, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As one of the people who attempted to redirect this back to the article on the high school, I see no reason this article needs to exist. Bensci54 (talk) 17:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the high school I attended 50 years ago won the 1920s version of a national high school band competition so many years in a row, they disbanded the contest and gave them the traveling trophy. The band director at the time was hired away by the University of Michigan where he was director of bands for over 20 years - and they are not notable. And it stands to reason that if the school itself is not notable, than an individual student activity wouldn't be either. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 21:02, 4 December 2023 (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. While there has been a late shift in sentiment that points to 'keep' due to changes to the article during this debate, the changes to the article actually make it really hard for me to assess whether this should be closed as 'keep' or 'no consensus'. This is because some comments were made prior to changes, others after the changes, and the relevance of those made prior to the changes are hard to assess.

What I do know for sure is there is no consensus to delete here in this discussion. I've elected to come down on the side of no consensus for the simple reason that if this needs to be explored again (referencing the 'new' version of the article) in the new year, it can be done earlier than if I was to close as 'keep'. Daniel (talk) 04:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Go Getters

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

Fails GNG and does not appear to meet NBAND. The sources cited in the article are not RSes: DISCOGS, Beat offers paid native content, Worldkustom.com has no editorial standards and appears to be an SPS, and volt.fm is a website to track Spotify statistics. The Weekend Edition is the only RS, but that does not provide SIGCOV. I have been unable to find additional sources from searching Google and TWL databases. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Sweden. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC):[reply]

It`s a Swedish band, most sources are in Swedish language, that`s why you can not find much info in English about it. Please take a look at Swedish version of the page: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_Getters Wikirapguru (talk) 15:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Their Swedish article has zero sources and almost no biographical information, making it even less useful than this one. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ - They've had a long career and probably a small regional following, but I can find no reliable and significant sources on the band in Swedish or English, nor have their albums received any pro reviews that I can find. They have a few of what appear to be magazine articles, already cited, but the nominator is correct on how they are unreliable and probably paid promotional services. All else to be found is from the band's social media and occasional fan blogs. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(18 days later...) I am changing my vote to Undecided due to the improvements made to the article since the nomination. The folks below found some sources but I am not convinced that they add up to significant coverage for this band, though my stance has softened and Admins can judge the other votes below. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to let you know @Doomsdayer520 that Julle has added additional sources; see below. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:16, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So are you saying that the Swedish version of the page can stay, but the English one has to be deleted? This does not make much sense to me. @Doomsdayer520 Wikirapguru (talk) 20:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikirapguru: Other language versions of Wikipedia are not relevant in determining whether this article meets the English Wikipedia's notability guidelines. See WP:OTHERLANGS. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:23, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How so?

I thought Wikipedia is a Wikipedia, there is 1 set of global rules. It makes no sense to say that Swedish version can stay, but English version must be deleted.

Do not close this discussion, I am going to have other unbiased editors like @4TheWynne look at it and decide on the outcome. @Doomsdayer520 Wikirapguru (talk) 23:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is not one set of global rules for all Wikipedias. Each Wikipedia community is self-governing. I would agree that if this version of the article is deleted, the Swedish version should also probably be deleted, but that will be up to the editors at Swedish Wikipedia, not us here.

Regarding closing this discussion, deletion discussions are usually allowed to run for 7 days and they are usually closed by administrators. You cannot choose who will close this conversation. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not have a set of global rules, they all have their own rules. I encourage you to look at WP:OTHERLANGS. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 23:51, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Voorts and Darling for chiming in while I was absent. @Wikirapguru severely over-reacted to my comment about the band's Swedish article. This person told us to look at the Swedish article as if that could inform this discussion, so I did. I said absolutely nothing about deleting or keeping the Swedish article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:43, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call it a severe over-reaction, just an inexperienced editor who wrote an article in good faith and doesn't quite understand how deletion decisions work across different language versions of Wikipedia. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ per ~~above~~ the sourcing issues outlined. even if it was notable for the Swedish Wikipedia (which it clearly seems to not be, given the article there has zero sources), the band has nothing reliable on them, just a small cult following and a few seemingly promotional articles. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 18:51, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't read too much into the lack of sources on Swedish Wikipedia. We don't spend as much time cleaning up old articles if they seem plausibly notable, given the much smaller number of editors – whereas sources are required for new articles, it's easier for an old unsourced article to survive on Swedish Wikipedia than on English Wikipedia, which means that people spend less focus sourcing them even if sources could be found.

(It's not unimportant! It's just that with one editor for every fifty editors on English Wikipedia, there are more articles to handle per editor. Sometimes lack of sources says more about Swedish Wikipedia than about the topic.)

In this particular case, I'm hopeful but not certain there are good enough sources to save the article. I've started by adding a full-page article from a few years back as a reference. /Julle (talk) 02:34, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
fair enough, I'll keep here then; good work. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 00:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There are a few hundred articles about them or mentioning them in the Swedish newspaper archive which covers most of the recent years (Retriever Mediearkivet). It's missing most from their early days. I've started adding something. /Julle (talk) 02:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given that we don't have access to the article that you just added, and if you can find a few more sources providing significant coverage, would you mind providing a brief description of each source? Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:49, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This article has experienced a lot of editing activity since this nomination. Can editors review the additions and see if they make a significant difference?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of sourcing, Wide Open Country and Ameripolitan are lists of award winners, not SIGCOV. The Bettajive Review is SIGCOV, but the website itself is an SPS. However, the people who run it are formerly journalists, so it's kinda reliable but there's no indication that they have a fact-checker or editor on staff. "Västeråsband kan få pris på världsgala" has no link to it and it's in Swedish, so I can't evaluate. Hopefully by the end of this relisting period @Julle can add some more Swedish sources and do some kind of source analysis so that other editors can evaluate whether those sources establish notability. If that doesn't happen, given that Julle thinks that the band might plausibly be notable, I'd be okay with draftify-ing this. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 17:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've not had time to dig further into this (too much to do given the upcoming holidays, unfortunately).

The article I've added is a one-page newspaper article from Vestmanlands Läns Tidning about the band when they were nominated to the award mentioned in the article. While I think the coverage is relevant for our assessment, I don't know much about the award itself.

In short, I hope it might be worth digging further if anyone with the right access has the time to do so, but as of writing this I think the sourcing is a bit weak in the article. /Julle (talk) 22:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Julle. Since you don't have time to dig through sources, unless someone else does, my !vote is draftify. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:20, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per improvements I think the article meets WP:GNG. Good work. also just because the original sources were in Swedish, it does not equal non notable or less important. English sources are good now.BabbaQ (talk) 09:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just to note that I wasn't implying that Swedish sources couldn't be used. I was just stating that I couldn't evaluate that particular source since I don't speak Swedish and don't know how to find it. That said, I still don't think that the current sources provide SIGCOV per my analysis above. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 01:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on the basis of WP:AGF as an editor in good standing has added several reliable sources news articles dedicated to the band that are not accessible on the internet and states that there are many more, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Julle has only added one offline source, and said that there might be more, but that he hasn't had time to look through them: I hope it might be worth digging further if anyone with the right access has the time to do so, but as of writing this I think the sourcing is a bit weak in the article. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will add that "there must be sources" is not an acceptable conclusion to an AfD discussion. With this AfD still sitting here for going on the three weeks, I'm assuming good faith but I'm also suspicious about whether those apparent sources will really come together. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. They've played gigs for a few decades, so a lot of the newspaper hits are brief mentions of festival appearances or concerts. Some are reviews (examples: "Ett koncept som håller", Mindy Lara in Borås Tidning, 2 October 2006 (400 words); "En stroke kan inte stoppa en riktig fest", Stefan Nordvall in Sundsvalls Tidning, 15 February 2016; "Rockabilly på riktigt i Hultsfred", Dennis Andersson in Barometern, 5 July in 2010). In addition to what I had added before, I think the most relevant piece is the 1800 words article "The Go Getters hyllar en saknad bandkollega" (2012), which I've included in the article. /Julle (talk) 19:40, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My !vote is now keep per sources found and added by Julle. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per improvements to article. Tooncool64 (talk) 02:37, 26 December 2023 (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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stephan Berg

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

Swedish songwriter whose only notability is winning the 1991 edition of the Eurovision Song Contest. Although he wrote another song for Eurovision which placed 14th I believe this article falls down on WP:ONEEVENT and should be deleted. Recently dePRODded. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:01, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, and Sweden. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:01, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He still seems to be active. He was inducted in this Hall of Fame [13], this talks about him [14] but it's paywalled. This is also paywalled but describes his career and a documentary made about him [15]. Oaktree b (talk) 16:22, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clearly established and notable career as a songwriter. Part of the Hall of Fame. WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 16:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Very strong keep Melodifestivalen participant (as a songwriter). J 1982 (talk) 17:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; apart of the Melodifestivalen Hall of Fame. (Swedish Wikipedia article) Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 18:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as a Hall of Fame member for Melodifestivalen as explained above. Does need some improvement in the layout. Ktkvtsh (talk) 05:11, 5 December 2023 (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. ^Complex/_Rational 17:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sore Throat (punk/new wave band)

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

No evidence that this band is in any way notable. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Can only find mentions of individuals with sore throats, nothing about a band. Gnewspapers doesn't have anything. Oaktree b (talk) 22:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - They were a pre-Internet local punk band so sources will be tough to find today, which may be unfair, but unless anyone can find anything in old magazines or punk history books, there is simply not enough with which to build a viable article here. Note that the article attempts to use an AllMusic bio page, but that page is just an empty placeholder and I suspect that it mixes up two bands of the same name. I can find no pro reviews or historical discussion for their one album either. The band is briefly mentioned at the article for one member who moved on to other things -- Matthew Flowers -- and the band could possibly be redirected to him, though I doubt that the current title is a likely search term. Finally, if the band article survives this process, it needs to be cleaned up severely. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not much notability, unfortunately; did play on The Old Grey Whistle Test (video), but other than that I haven't found much. I don't think this is worth a redirect; the search term is fairly unlikely and Flowers wasn't really a frontman, just a manager/co-songwriter/keyboard player. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 19:02, 3 December 2023 (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. I don't see a consensus here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kristen Lawrence

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

Notability challenged since 2012. Given the subject's BLP status and possible issues regarding quality of sources, there are several moving parts here and I think it would be best to open this to the community for discussion. AfD participants should consult talk page for arguments made therein. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Music. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Source 19 and 28 are fine. It's not a slam dunk, but that's just enough coverage to build an article. Oaktree b (talk) 14:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The "arguments" given on the talk page are over 10 yrs ago, I wouldn't count the online chart as notable. I'll give them the paper sources existing (I can't confirm or deny), but the rest don't seem to help the discussion here... The last point in particular doesn't seem to hold true (I don't see this person has become notable for Halloween music, a decade after the comment was made), and it was iffy then... Oaktree b (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that source #19 for Keyboard Magazine is now defunct and the link just goes to the mag's general website. If it once had a precise article on Ms. Lawrence, I cannot find it online. Source #28 is functional and it is a local newspaper article; it's reliable but one of very few such sources. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboard Magazine archive link. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 16:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The "Keep" vote above is based on about 1.5 reliable sources (see my comment above) and I cannot find anything else significant and reliable beyond the Daily Pilot article that is currently at footnote #28. Regarding the talk page discussion, the named chart does not qualify, and Ms. Lawrence could be considered "one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style" under WP:NMUSICIAN, **IF** Halloween Carols are a notable genre, and that is not convincing. Otherwise she is a working musician with various symphonies and has focused on some unique personal interests, but that does not make her notable enough for an article here. This article is dependent on personal and self-promotional sources, and tries to fill space with desperate leaps of notability, such as being mentioned in the same magazine as someone loosely affiliated with Iron Maiden or being asked to comment on someone else's book. She clearly does some unique things, but sorry no cigar. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Oaktree b. Yes, too many primary sources are used, but independent profiles in the Orange County Register and Los Angeles Times a decade apart (plus Keyboard Magazine) are enough for BASIC. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 16:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
By BASIC, do you mean GNG? If so, GNG's not enough. She also needs to meet WP:NMUSICIAN. GNG is only for topics which don't have their own notability guidelines. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 20:15, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I mean WP:BASIC (basically GNG for people), which is sufficient for notability: People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 23:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is untrue, GNG applies to every single topic not covered by a SNG which is stricter than the GNG (mostly NCORP and NEVENT). Mach61 (talk) 05:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Um...that's what I said: GNG is for topics which don't have their own guidelines. This article, being about a musician, would fall under WP:NMUSICIAN. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 21:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is not correct. WP:NMUSIC does not overrule WP:GNG. Any music artist can be kept by passing GNG. In any case criteria 1 of WP:NMUSIC is exactly the same as GNG. The only SNGs that overrule GNG is WP:NCORP which is stricter, WP:ACADEMIC which is looser, and WP:NEVENT that may be stricter in some circumstances, imv Atlantic306 (talk)

Keep per Oaktree b; meets WP:GNG. Darling ☔ (talk · contribs) 19:24, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If passing GNG is all it takes, why are there so many different notability standards? I keep seeing this idea that "it meets GNG; ergo, it's automatically notable across the board." Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 04:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I don't see even a rough consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Excessive reliance on sources like PR Newswire and Facebook. If kept, take a flamethrower to the unencyclopedic language and poorly sourced content. BD2412 T 02:16, 12 December 2023 (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) 15:15, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Subject meets WP:GNG per the analysis provided by Oaktree b. Some cleanup is needed to remove some puffery and remove some of the primary sources but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. User:Let'srun 19:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Fair warning: if this gets kept, I'm stubbing TF out of it. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 20:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I have, in another editor's words, "taken a flamethrower" to the fluff and questionable sources on this article. There's...not much left. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 03:52, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - assuming the article will be edited to remove unsourced content, blogs, CD liner notes, press releases, social media, etc, there does not appear to be support for notability according to any guideline, based on other available sources, because this appears to be WP:PROMO: brief 2011 local coverage about a concert series for children; 2010 interview with Keyboard Magazine promoting brands of instruments; 2009 interview with the Orange County Register; a 2012 KPBS event listing with "You can also listen to Poe set to music by Orange County's Kristen Lawrence" at the end of the list; and a 2018 local news interview reprinted in the LA Times mentioning an upcoming performance and recently-released album. What seems to be missing is substantial independent, reliable, secondary coverage to support WP:BASIC/WP:GNG, or reviews or other substantial independent coverage of her work to support WP:CREATIVE or WP:MUSICBIO notability; an article based primarily on what she says about her work does not help develop a neutral and balanced BLP. Beccaynr (talk) 17:25, 23 December 2023 (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 06:43, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Beth Quist

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC with no chart activity or third-party coverage. Article has remained in its current state since 2006 creation. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 03:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree that the article fails WP:NMUSIC. Doing some research reveals some sources but none of them are sufficient to pass. She has a song that has a quarter of a million listens on Spotify which would lean the article more towards passing but there's simply not enough media coverage. GoldMiner24 ^Talk 03:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and United States of America. Skynxnex (talk) 04:07, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reply: I am not very familiar with WP:NMUSIC but after trying to find sources for this article, I think she may meet notability. She performs and/or records with two Grammy Award winners, Kitarō and Bobby McFerrin, and is a long-time collaborator with the latter. I did not add this to the article but saw in several sources that she is also in a band with a member of the rock band Heart. She also composed music for both Cirque du Soleil and an Emmy nominated film. Does this fit WP:NMUSIC? Rublamb (talk) 15:32, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Described as an electro-Balkan meets New age artist in some sources, but all are streaming sites, social media, then non-RS. There just isn't enough in RS to keep the article. Having a large number of streams on a certain platform isn't notable for our purposes. Oaktree b (talk) 15:11, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think I have solved the coverage issue with non-social media sources. Rublamb (talk) 22:44, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I have found and added enough secondary sources to convince me of notability. Rublamb (talk) 22:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for searching. However, these don't really establish notability. The Albuquerque Journal is a passing mention, both Taos News articles and Corvallis Gazette are promotional pieces for upcoming shows, and Rock at Night doesn't appear to be a reliable source. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 07:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Perhaps you did not read the "About" page for Rock at Night Magazine. It used to be a print publication and is writen by staff journalists. From its website: "Covering globally, but concentrated in the United States, United Kingdom, and Europe, Rock At Night is dedicated to professional journalism and photography, publishing news daily, in its website and many social media formats." Thus, this is a reliable secondary source. Rublamb (talk) 15:14, 30 November 2023 (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)} 03:29, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It would be helpful to get more opinions about recently added sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable enough. killer bee  05:04, 12 December 2023 (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. No one is arguing for retention, and no indication any input is forthcoming. Star Mississippi 19:42, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Válá Meshkin

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

Declined prod. Only 1 article links to this. Could not significant coverage of this individual in news and google books searches. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 11:21, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Architecture, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 11:21, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - He may be better known as an architect than a musician, but several of his architect related citations are from books or publications that cannot be accessed online to verify. None of his music citations are acceptable, so even if the page is kept it needs to be edited to remove much of his music info. If someone can find verifiable citations, let me know and I can change my vote.Royal88888 (talk) 21:25, 26 November 2023 (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 11:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:14, 10 December 2023 (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 12:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Soulframe

AfDs for this article:

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails the meet the general band-spcific notability policies. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:24, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. UtherSRG (talk) 17:24, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I have added content and references. They released two studio albums, toured Australia and were described in various independent reliable sources, hence notable according to WP:NBAND.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:13, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:08, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails GNG and NORG/CORP. Source eval:

Comments	Source
Contributor database entry	1. McPhee, Stu. "Soulframe - Escaping Entropy Review". Ear Medicine. Archived from the original on 29 August 2007. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Contributor review on Brisbane Christian Chat	2. ^ Jump up to:a b c d "Music >> Soulframe". Brisbane Christian Chat (Queensland, Australia). Archived from the original on 12 October 2003. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Database entry on broadcaster	Queensland \| Soulframe". Triple J (Australian Broadcasting Corporation ABC)). Archived from the original on 1 September 2004. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Two sentence mill news	4. ^ Eliezer, Christie (14 May 2002). "Music & Media Business News". themusic.com.au. Archived from the original on 16 September 2004. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Name listed, nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	5. ^ "The 4th Annual MusicOz Award Finalists". MusicOz. Archived from the original on 17 December 2005.
Name listed, nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	6. ^ "Official Results". Australian Songwriters Association. Archived from the original on 19 August 2006. Retrieved 24 November 2023.
Two sentence mill news, fails WP:IS	7. ^ "APRA Members Win Big at 2005 Pacific Songwriting Competition". APRA AMCOS. Archived from the original on 17 June 2005. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Database entry, "Source:courtesy of Soulframe"	8. ^ "Releases :: Escaping Entropy". Australian Music Online. Archived from the original on 26 November 2007. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Interview, fails WP:IS	9. ^ "Interviews". Time Off. Archived from the original on 20 November 2004. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Promo, fails WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV	10. ^ "Artists – Soulframe". AC Music. 15 January 2001. Archived from the original on 6 March 2001. Retrieved 25 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Nothing about subject, fails WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth	11. ^ "Irishman Takes Australian Idol". PerthNow. 26 November 2006. Archived from the original on 26 October 2022. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
Soulframe Official Website, fails WP:IS	12. ^ Whitworth, Hayden; Mutton, Guy "Mutto"; Smith, Scott; Carey, Zane (1 February 2008). "Important Notice from the Band". Soulframe Official Website. Archived from the original on 9 January 2008. Retrieved 24 November 2023.
Promo band bio, fails WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV	13. ^ "Toupee Records : Artist Info". Archived from the original on 28 August 2005. Retrieved 19 December 2006.
Name mentioned in list, nothing meeting WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV	14. ^ "Resources Home : Engineers and Producers". brispop.com. Archived from the original on 22 August 2006. Retrieved 24 November 2023 – via National Library of Australia.
404	15. ^ "MGM Distribution". Thegroovemerchants.com. Retrieved 26 July 2013.

No sourcing from WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 17:21, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 17:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Timothy's excellent analysis shows WP:NBAND not met. LibStar (talk) 02:41, 9 December 2023 (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!} 08:19, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Herminigildo Ranera

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

Successful musician, but doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 21:07, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, Philippines, and Colorado. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:12, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but needs rewrite and more sources, because the current article reads like it was lifted from a CV. With regard to notability, I would argue that this article can be retained as the subject is significantly notable in the Philippines. Ranera was a NAMCYA winner (which is one of the top music competitions in the country), and was a former conductor of the national orchestra. His current group (UST Symphony Orchestra) is also a resident group of the country's premier cultural institution. --- Tito Pao (talk) 10:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep though some sprucing up is needed (such as but not limited to more relevant references as one isn't enough, an infobox template and probably a freely licensed photo). -Ian Lopez @ 16:05, 9 December 2023 (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. That said, the sheer magnitude of the article in Russian should make us question whether we have a notability issue, or a translation issue. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:52, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ptaha

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

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. No indication of notability whatsoever. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Russia. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep appears to be notable for his legal troubles, and has enough context to meet BLP1E [16] Mach61 (talk) 20:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
CNN BBC news report with coverage of him in the last minute Mach61 (talk) 20:37, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both sources you've presented are not about the rapper's career, but only talk about his legal troubles, which are not enough for establishing notability; the BBC report only mentions the subject in passing and show a brief interview. There isn't even a single mention of any of his legal issues here on Wikipedia anyway. CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:37, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't have anything to do with legal troubles. Mach61 (talk) 14:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mach61: Once again, that source only mentions the rapper in passing and isn't solely about his career. Sources that mention the subject only in passing are not enough for establishing notability. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the aggregate, they do establish notability Mach61 (talk) 22:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep needs translation from corresponding Russian Wikipedia article (Heroeswithmetaphors) talk 20:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The two Keep arguments are not strong, but not one !vote has supported deletion. This needs more discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 07:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Fails notability. No in-depth coverage, rather is about an event, that doesn't make him notable. Atighot (talk) 16:12, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 10:59, 5 December 2023 (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. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 02:54, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ross Monroe Winter

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

Fails to meet notability criteria for musicians and ensembles under [[17]]. Holding a (presumably section) position in a professional orchestra and holding a professorship do not on their own qualify, and if the Robert Downey, Jr. event qualifies, it could be placed on the film's Wikipedia page without need for this entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arcticwarp (talk • contribs) 00:54, November 17, 2023 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:48, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:11, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding more legwork since nobody else has commented. Notability with respect to music would require one of 12 points in the linked list from my previous comment. 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 would all be easy to find if satisfied. Point 6 requires being a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles. The first source in the article is titled "Virginia Symphony Welcomes New Musicians : Principal Timpani, Principal Trumpet and Core Violinists Announced", and in general a non-titled chair in an orchestra would not be considered "reasonably prominent." The Richmond Symphony link also just lists him as "violin" without any title. I only see "reasonably prominent" satisfied within the Wintergreen Festival Orchestra, which hasn't merited its own Wiki page. The only point someone could make an argument for here would be point 1's two independent sources, but I would argue the source from Mason News to be trivial, and the source about him tutoring Robert Downey, Jr could just be folded into a different article even if it doesn't qualify as a minor news story that wouldn't grant notability. I also checked Wikipedia's notability standards for academics[[18]], and I can't find any indication this subject satisfies them. --Arcticwarp (talk) 05:14, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear from more experienced editors than the nominator who has been active a week and has 9 edits to their account.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:15, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP - I just added a current source from the University of Central Florida, which brings this violin professor's background bio up to date. A basic problem on this article is that the sourcing has been nine years out of date, while the professor himself has continued with his career. There's a lot about him on Google. — Maile (talk) 01:29, 2 December 2023 (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!} 03:13, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I'm not seeing notability for PROF as being met, appears to be simply a working academic/musician. Oaktree b (talk) 14:36, 8 December 2023 (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. I see a rough consensus to Delete and the copyright questions seal the deal. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:26, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tor Ingar Jakobsen

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

Sources are either from his website (source 1), written by him (source 5) or provide no significant coverage (sources 2-4). No indication of WP:NMUSICIAN. Also a likely WP:COI creation, as the author created the two articles in the first paragraph (since deleted). Google search also doesn't show anything useful. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 18:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Norway. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 18:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:19, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Have added more links and content to make the article more relevant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morpfhoby (talk • contribs) 20:31, 12 November 2023 (UTC) — Morpfhoby (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please assess expansion of article since nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: How on earth can you use his own website as a source?!?! MaskedSinger (talk) 10:55, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. Yes, his website has been used as source for things like his year of birth, and which town he was born in. All the other main achievements, as his published books, rewards, productions and work for musical theatre are covered with other sources as newspaper articles, press reviews, publications from publishers etc.I therefore still think it should be kept. Morpfhoby (talk) 21:15, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify Smells like COI, should be come from AFC process. DJ InstaMalik (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2023 (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!} 22:20, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well the publicity photograph is filched directly off the subject's own copyrighted WWW site. Let's see about the article text, with the subject's own autobiography on the left and Special:Permalink/1184636506 (the article as nominated for deletion) on the right:

Subsequent edits such as Special:Diff/1184661405 have lifted more sentences straight from the autobiography and attributed them to some other source. This isn't original writing. This is a foundational copyright violation of an autobiography. Uncle G (talk) 12:04, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. I have deleted the content where his website was the source, and therefor also the content that did quote his homepage. I therefor think the copyright problem and reliable source problem now should be solved. Morpfhoby (talk) 09:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 3 gnews hits says it all, fails WP:BIO. Possible promotional article by a single purpose editor. LibStar (talk) 01:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
3 gnews hits says it all – no, not really. Offline sources could potentially exist. See also the National Library's 600 newspaper results for his name, which is just as useless a gauge for notability on WP. This article isn't something I'm particularly invested in, so I'll let someone else do the digging here, but it is likely that there are enough in-depth sources about the subject to warrant inclusion. ArcticSeeress (talk) 11:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails GNG in the sense that the sourcing presented is either not indepdenent or not significant coverage. Daniel (talk) 21:55, 9 December 2023 (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) Atlantic306 (talk) 00:34, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rami Meir

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

I believe this article qualifies for deletion under a variety of policies; however the most relevant are WP:ARTIST/WP:GNG. More specifically, w/ regards to the former, the only permanent exhibit of Rami Meir's artwork is hosted by the Union of Mountain Jewish Artists of Russia (hereafter UMJAR), an organization he was the chairman of. Further, with the research I've done, all sources regarding the article subject seem to lack WP:RELIABILITY, with most of the references (both listed and others I found through research) seeming to violate WP:COI, if not directly WP:SELFSOURCE. For those sources for which I was not able to find direct evidence of CoI, I have significant concerns about WP:PARTISAN, due to a consistent lack of citations within the sources as well as other issues. To expound on a few of these claims further:

With regards to STMEGI sources, of which several on Rami Meir can be found, I believe these to be CoI. One of the cited references currently on the Article has a quote from the executive director of STMEGI claiming "[STMEGI] invited [UMJAR] to unite into a professional Union at the site of the Community Center of Mountain Jews in Sokolniki,” following which Rami Meir was elected chairman. Additionally, STMEGI seems to be an ongoing financial backer/charitable donor of UMJAR. Further, STMEGI has ties to Meir specifically, having previously awarded him their S.I. Weinstein Prize in 2021 as well as having hired him previously as an educator.

With regard to the various Azerbaijani news sources (the one referencing Meir most frequently being media.az, but all the sources I've found in this category share similar flaws), ensuring that these sources are verifiable or reputable has been difficult. Admittedly, this could be due to language/cultural barriers so I welcome input from those more familiar; however due to the concerns RE media freedoms in Azerbaijan, and the lack of citations or similar journalistic practices, these sources lack any way to verify their accuracy and independence. Media.az--again as an example--lacks any listed author on its article pages. The only contributor I can find evidence of on the site is their editor-in-chief, who received an honorary journalism degree directly from the President of Azerbaijan, along with others in the publication's leadership team. While this doesn't necessarily prove that that the source is biased, it does add further strain to the reputability IMO.

There are additional concerns I have about the article's quality; however for the most part they don't necessarily reach the reasons for deletion in their own right, so I'll not mention them unless they become relevant. KJGinger (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. KJGinger (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. KJGinger (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. KJGinger (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. 23:21, 7 November 2023 (UTC)--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:21, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Poetry, and Israel. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know enough about poet and musician notability, but far as his artwork most everything is PR or passing mentions user generated. fails WP:ARTIST. Hoping someone from another sort list will comment. As far as the reasons listed in (UMJAR etc.) I don't feel I can address. The specificity of the request makes this article hard to vote on. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2023 (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, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no improvement or participation since I looked for sources on 11 November 2023. Fails WP:ARTIST and reads like promotion of a living person. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets GNG, [19], [20], [21], [22], [23]. I think a search for Ра́ми Ме́ир would turn up more. // Timothy :: talk 12:38, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 05:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes WP:GNG. Katy Williamson (talk) 07:40, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - seems ok, but needs to be better sourced. Since most sources appear to come from the same website. Furthermore, it appears he is notable enough considering career as well as chairmanship of artistic union. Homerethegreat (talk) 10:12, 24 November 2023 (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!} 07:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Doesn't seem to be a WP:GNG issue here.MaskedSinger (talk) 08:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added more sources. Passes WP:GNG.Antimargi (talk) 13:47, 3 December 2023 (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

Bands and musicians

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Categories

References