Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elliterate

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 CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 09:23, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Elliterate

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

Subject does not appear to have attracted the attention of media sources outside of his Montana home region (the Montana Kaimen, etc.). Refs to the Seattle Times do not actually mention the subject but rather projects he was involved with. I don't see evidence of broader public interest via independent reliable sources. KDS4444^Talk 06:50, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should more sources be added from his work in California and Seattle? Wasn't sure how many sources needed but his resume boasts many notable collaborations/shows etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapthatgavelup (talk • contribs) 01:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What the article needs is references that discus the subject of the article in depth and also have broad interest and circulation— major regional and national newspapers or similarly circulated magazines ("People", "Newsweek"). It isn't so much a question of where (geographically) these sources are located, but of who reads them (with large readership indicating a measure of notability) and of what they bother to say about him (a mention in passing is not as much an indicator as a personal interview). Links that lack independence from the subject such as the one to "Shaymlusly Elliterate Events" and the one to http://shaymlusly-elliterate.bandcamp.com do nothing to support a notability claim. The reference to the Seattle Public Theater does not link to anything that discusses him, so a reference like that doesn't help either. Neither does the Black Budget Music link. And these last two types of "references" (i.e., web pages) need to be places where the subject of the article is discussed, not places where his performances can be heard or where a track listing can be viewed or where his name is mentioned as performing in a certain night (all of which are considered trivial and most of which are likely to lack independence from the subject). Also not useful: press releases, album announcements, and anything that comes directly from the artist or those promoting him. The article needs multiple (at least two) references from reliable (i.e., well-known) independent sources which discuss the subject in depth. Lastly, please sign your entries with four tildes at the end to automatically produce your signature. Thanks! KDS4444^Talk 07:31, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:41, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 04:39, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 04:39, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 04:39, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 04:39, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the article looks acceptable at first but there's no simply no better coverage for better improvement. SwisterTwister talk 07:18, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:37, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Looking through the links doesn't convey a sense that the subject has achieved a significant following or industry awareness. Simply performing and making/releasing music by itself in not particularly noteworthy unless there is evidence of an impact of some sort via independent press coverage. ShelbyMarion (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - We have a low barrier to popular culture content and our readers come to us for the breadth we are able to present. This is a nicely done, well documented piece. Keep under GNG. Carrite (talk) 18:13, 29 November 2015 (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.