Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Verity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:35, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

David Verity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Deprodded without rationale or improvement. Meets neither WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO Onel5969 TT me 00:25, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 02:59, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was deprodded because the only thing on this page at the time this article was created was a redirect. I added the appropriate article for this page. Further, you have falsely asserted that this article doesn't meet notability guidelines. The article clearly disproves that. I will list them in order of their numeration on the notability guidelines page. 2 - artist was #1 on Billboard's former BTN chart. 5 - Has released projects on Universal and JVC Kenwood / Victor Entertainment. #9 (Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition.) Has won The John Lennon Songwriting Award two years in a row as well as the USA Songwriting Competition. Knawwwledge (talk) 03:14, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Knawwwledge - I notice you are a new editor - thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. The article needs to include references that reflect Wikipedia's WP:GNG notability guideline. Is it possible for you to add references to the article? See also Help:Referencing for beginners. Hmlarson (talk) 03:50, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmlarson Thank you for your welcome, I really appreciate it. It has been hard to make sense of the workflow involved around here. I have added the references for the Universal signing press release, and the JVC deal through All Music Database for the album on JVC Japan. Unfortunately, some references are no long available, such as the now defunct Farmclub and Billboard Talentnet Chart. Knawwwledge (talk) 04:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:20, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's relative and comes down to context.For instance it's acceptable to include a former soccer player, but not someone who's achieved things in the music world. I've added citations from personal twitter accounts from Jon B, added citations from All Music which is the leading discography website proving his release on a major label, added a direct citation for the Getty Images relationship, added a citation linking to HMV, which it clearly says right her eon Wikipedia is the largest music retailer in the United Kingdom, overtaking Amazon, and they did a feature on this artist. I also linked to a song he produced for a singer who sang a Grammy award winning song. I understand that perhaps context is a factor here. Some people don't watch soccer, and some people may not be familiar with R&B music. I understand that. But when given it's proper context of being an R&B musician, I think this article fits. Knawwwledge (talk) 22:09, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 22:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I found no in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Rentier (talk) 00:18, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable musician. The available sourcing doesn't indicate why he should be included in Wikipedia, and he certainly doesn't meet the MUSICBIO. Since he meets neither the SNG or the GNG, he is excluded from coverage in Wikipedia by WP:N. Also, I want to note that the relist here was unneeded: I commented to make the consensus clearer so another relist didn't happen, but there was a clear consensus favouring deletion beforehand with only an SPA arguing against deletion with non-policy based arguments. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:58, 21 August 2017 (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.