Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Murdoch
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. Owen× ☎ 13:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Nick Murdoch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not convinced that this gentleman passes our general notability guidelines. The first reference mentions that he won the Manchester International Organ competition. Is this enough to pass criterion 9 of our criteria for musicians and ensembles? doomgaze (talk) 13:13, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I don't see why this artcle should be deleted. –BuickCenturyDriver 13:17, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, as I said above, he appears to fail both WP:GNG and (as far as I can see) WP:MUSICBIO. Why do you believe this article should be kept? doomgaze (talk) 13:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It has references, and I get dozens of hits about this person on Google. Nuff said. –BuickCenturyDriver 13:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- But no references that constitute significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Plus, only false positives on Google News. What 'hits' are you referring to? doomgaze (talk) 13:36, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Very weak keep - A quick websearch suggests that this fellow may be noteworthy enough for a keep, although I suspect the article is an autobiography, or at least was at first.[1] (a bombarde is an organ stop). It needs wikifying, and some further references adding but I'm not sure I can personally be bothered...not really the spirit of a Wiki, but I don't like autobiographical articles. Bob talk 22:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - No indication that significant coverage exists on this person, so fails WP:GNG Mtking (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 04:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - one independent source found here - British and international music yearbook, Volume 1. There is an amount of coverage of Murdoch Scott Productions Ltd - mentioned in the article on Google, but this is not the subject of the article; its one of his works. I don't see sufficient notability to satisfy the criteria for musicians and ensembles. --Whiteguru (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2011 (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.