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

Paul Pavlovich

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

WP:BLP of a musician and artist, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing either WP:NMUSIC or WP:NARTIST.
The attempted notability claim as a musician is that he was formerly lead singer of a band, but band members are not "inherently" notable enough for their own standalone articles as separate topics from their bands just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy coverage that focuses specifically on them (as opposed to just glancingly namechecking them in coverage of the band) -- however, the only music-related footnote here is a "10 best death metal singers" listicle in an unreliable source, which is not sufficient to claim passage of NMUSIC by itself.
And the attempted notability claim as a visual artist is that he's had local art shows in the region where he lives, referenced to one short blurb and a glancing namecheck of his existence in an article about somebody else, which is not sufficient to get him over the notability bar for visual artists either.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a lot more and better coverage in reliable sources than this. Bearcat (talk) 22:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 22:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Gall

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

WP:BLP of a musician, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC as an individual. As always, members of bands are not "inherently" notable enough for their own standalone articles just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy coverage in reliable sources that focuses specifically on them (as opposed to just being glancingly namechecked in coverage of the band) -- but the sole footnote here is the band's own self-published website about itself, which is not support for notability. Bearcat (talk) 21:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 21:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Kiser (musician)

AfDs for this article:

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

WP:BLP of a musician, with no properly sourced claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. This is a followup to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exitsect: the attempted notability claim here is NMUSIC #6, "musician who has been in two independently notable bands", except Exitsect is one of the two bands despite there being no discernible evidence that they ever did anything more than briefly exist -- but this article otherwise says nothing else about him, literally going "he is a musician who has been in bands, the end", and the only footnote here is the same unreliable source that's the only footnote in Exitsect's article too. Bearcat (talk) 21:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 21:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exitsect

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

Article about a band, not reliably sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. This was created in 2016 based entirely on a single unreliable source dated 2008, but has never had even one new word added to it since then about them doing anything (touring? recording?) — and one of the four stated members, whose standalone article incidentally fails to mention this band at all, died in 2015 (i.e. nine years ago, and one full year before this article even existed), yet this article still uses the present tense to describe his membership even though he was already dead, and thus clearly not still in the band even if they did still exist, in 2016.
The intended notability claim was clearly NMUSIC #6, "multiple independently notable members", but it's falling into the circular notability-loop trap that NMUSIC explicitly says to watch out for: the only member who has a strong claim to standalone notability as an individual is the dead guy, whose notability hinges on two other bands without mentioning this band at all, two of the other three members are clearly trying to wriggle through the "notable because they've been in this band that's notable because they were in it" loophole, and the third other member is staking his attempted standalone notability on one other band while again failing to mention this one at all, meaning three of the four members are also AFD candidates without clear or properly sourced claims to standalone notability.
So clearly this is a band that briefly existed in 2008, but there's no properly sourced evidence that they ever actually did anything besides briefly exist, and nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have reliably sourced evidence of actually doing something. Bearcat (talk) 20:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 20:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edgar Guerrero

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

Nominated for deletion as WP:BLP1E: known only for appearing on La Academia and his romantic involvement with Yuridia. The article has existed for just over 18 years and the subject has yet to demonstrate any other notability. Attempts to find anything notable about the subject only resulted in tabloid-style information about Yuridia; the fact that she is notable does not confer notability onto him. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have fully implemented {{subst:afd2}}, which had not been done. No opinion or comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Radio, Advertising, Mexico, Arizona, and Idaho. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete nothing on it. Xegma(talk) 16:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - In agreement with the nominator. If he was really honored with "Edgar Guerrero Day" in Burley, Idaho, I can only find one independent mention of it in a local newspaper though he often repeats it in his own self-promotions. His minor placement in a reality show does not satisfy WP:BLP1E. The nominator is correct about his later personal life. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty Mary Sunshine

AfDs for this article:

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, only mentions. None of the links in the article are reliable sources. toweli (talk) 10:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Washington. toweli (talk) 10:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Immortal Disfigurement

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

Band fails WP:BAND with no coverage in reliable sources. GTrang (talk) 02:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GTrang (talk) 02:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It is WP:TOOSOON to be charitable. The formation of the band got a few notices in the metal press because the singer is known for being in a better-known band previously, but this article tries to latch onto that band's notability in violation of WP:NOTINHERITED. Otherwise the article is dependent on unreliable social media chatter because the reliable media has not reported on the band or its releases. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Réjane Magloire

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

Appears to fail WP:NMUSICIAN. Couldn't find any significant coverage or chart listings. C F A 💬 23:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and New York. C F A 💬 23:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rouzbeh Rafie

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

Fails WP:COMPOSER. None of the sources here establish WP:GNG notability, either on account of not being independent (personal website, profile at Ulysses platform, which appears to allow self published pages, Ermes 404 a publisher of his music, an interview with Rafie), reliable (wordpress blog) or significant (pretty much all the other sources).

Criterion 3 of COMPOSER states that those who have written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. may be notable, but none of the competitions he has won appear to be "major" (at the very least, they don't have Wikipedia articles) Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Iran, and Italy. Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few more reliable independent sources (e.g. Association of Iranian Contemporary Music Composers (ACIMC)).

In my opinion, Rafie meets criteria for Wikipedia:NMUSICOTHER, saying "Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria: Has composed a number of notable melodies, tunes, or standards used in a notable music genre."

The competitions are notable from my point of view, especially considering the small world of contemporary experimental (classical) music. E.G. a festival like MUSEQUAL https://www.kokonainenfestival.fi/?lang=en has a very good reputation, even without a wiki article Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 08:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klaviermusikfan1972 None of the sources you added move the needle with regard to being independent and in-depth. (for example this is a profile on the website of an organization Rafie is a member of).

Rafie does not meet that criterion of NMUSICOTHER, because a "notable" composition is one that qualifies for an article, by having sources cover it. None of Rafie's originals have gotten that. Mach61 17:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Robinson (paperfolder)

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

No reliable secondary sources. External links section points to a couple interviews, but just interviews can’t uphold an entire article. This deletion discussion is alongside Typhoon Saturday. This page was created by an IP address (IP is coincidentally is in the same place Nick Robinson is from), and was later edited by accounts named "Iamnickrobinson" and "Robinnick" a.k.a the most obvious WP:COI violation of the decade. Roasted (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Bands and musicians. Roasted (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This promotional article (seems like it is mostly an autobiographic creation) on an artist does not meet notability criteria WP:NARTIST nor WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 17:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 17:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Need more sources and sections are unsourced. Xegma(talk) 17:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find enough coverage about this person; [1] was the best I could bring up. Tried French sources as well as he's lectured in France, nothing... Oaktree b (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can't find any book reviews, nothing in the Getty ULAN [2], so doesn't seem to pass artist or author notability either. Oaktree b (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this can be salvaged as notable. Many books on origami and he is listed as a contributor to the online Encyclopædia Britannica . Heavy online presence as an origami teacher. I hope to take a longer look at this in the next couple a days. I ran out of steam after creating (losing and the recreating) the source analysis for Gar Waterman. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is a review of his solo album by Jazz Journal. toweli (talk) 08:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon Saturday

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

I cannot find any sources on this band. Closest thing to a source is a blog music review. I tried to PROD the page, but the creator came back from the catacombs to remove the tag, then add a deprecated source. Roasted (talk) 16:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Roasted (talk) 16:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm was in the band and am NOT a wiki expert. I emerged from the catacombs when I read there was an issue. I discovered that discogs is deprecated (wiki didn't say which source was a problem & it wasn't in the past), so I removed that. I'm at a loss to understand why the page is not acceptable. Are you suggesting the band didn't exist? That three records on Polydor & that our drummer Titch subsequently selling millions of records with Living in a Box doesn't make it worthy of inclusion? There are dozens of entries that seem to me equally "insignificant" but still part of the music history of the UK. Robinsonnick (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NMUSICBIO. Roasted (talk) 19:35, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete could not find any sources with significant coverage of this band and it doesn't look like they ever charted, does not meet WP:BAND. Orange sticker (talk) 12:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The band included some members that went on to bigger things later, but that does not make them notable per WP:INHERITED. They had few accomplishments of their own, and I can find no reliable media coverage, even via a Google Books search because they were a pre-internet band. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lil Tony (North Carolina rapper)

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

This is very much centred on WP:BLP1E. Fails WP:NMUSICIAN, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Crime, and North Carolina. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The event in question that they are known for is a murder that has extensive coverage by news sources and should pass WP:PERP due to the obscene nature of the crime. cyberdog958^Talk 21:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lil Tony (Georgia rapper)

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Could not find sources to establish either this or WP:ANYBIO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Georgia (U.S. state). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Pitchfork and HIp Hop News are RS, we also have decent coverage in [3]. Not much coverage, but that's three sources and more than most articles we see in AfD Oaktree b (talk) 14:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b Pitchfork and HipHop News are definitely reliable sources, but they do not provide the relevant significant coverage that we're looking out for. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Hip Hop Canada link I added above adds context, with the three, I think we have musical notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your stand, by the way :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Smail

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

Articles for the New York Times makes no mention of the subject, most of the other sources are merely passing mentions. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Jamiebuba (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed New York Times article, added further sources to add to proof of WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV (The Times, BBC Radio 4) AscanioB (talk) 14:10, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

further mentions from Tatler and The Standard have been included. AscanioB (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:58, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Gelboys

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

Simply fails WP:NBAND, couldn't find any source to establish that or generally WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Philippines. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the one source is just a concert listing, not sigcov. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 15:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I couldn't find any coverage other than the article already listed so does not possess WP:SIGCOV. cyberdog958^Talk 05:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Eid

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:NMUSICBIO and WP:NACTOR. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Music, and Egypt. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 07:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are some articles about him. One at Billboard, 01/9/2024 - From The Rolling Stones to ‘RIVO’: Amir Eid on the Intersection Between Acting and Music - By Mayya Al Ogail, and then there's Cairo Scene, Jul 18, 2024 - Cairokee Lead Singer Amir Eid Releases First Chapter of Solo EP ‘Roxi’ and Ahram Online , Saturday 3 Aug 2024 - Cairokee Amir Eid debut solo EP Roxi featured in Times Square billboard to mention a few. I'm satisfied it meets the requirements. in saying that, the page needs a whole lot of work. I can see why it attracted a deletion nomination. It seems it was hastily put together. If people put work into it, it will turn out to be a worthwhile article. Karl Twist (talk) 12:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Kelblizz

AfDs for this article:

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

This is very much A7-able, but let's look at it together. This article has a long history of sockpuppetry, and while not the grounds of this nomination, the same problems from the 2019 AfD persist. This article simply does not tell us why Kelblizz is a notable disc jokey, just like we had DJ YK Mule. Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:MUSICIAN, or WP:GNG for having too many (if not all, see analysis below) churnalism, non-INDEPENDENT and non-RS pieces.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Vanderwaalforces
https://thenationonlineng.net/meet-dj-kelblizz-the-nigerian-dj-breaking-limits-with-melodic-sounds/	Way promotional piece from the reliable The Nation (per WP:NGRS)	We can't rely on a piece that is this promotional.	Sadly, this does not provide WP:SIGCOV on details we can add in an encyclopedia for him but rather promotion and praises.	✘ No
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/07/i-want-to-contribute-to-growth-of-afrobeats-dj-kelblizz/	Promotional piece from the marginally reliable Vanguard (per WP:VANGUARD). Also, has statements that make it clear that it is very much dependent on the subject.	We can't rely on a piece that is this promotional, lacks a byline and comes from a marginally reliable source per WP:VANGUARD.	Ditto The Nation.	✘ No
https://thenicheng.com/meet-dj-kelblizz-the-dj-extending-a-new-era-of-good-music/	Has statements that make it clear that it is very much dependent on the subject, definitely coming from one who knows Kelblizz very well, likely himself.	Source is okay, but we can't rely on a piece that clearly fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	~ Ditto.	✘ No
https://theeagleonline.com.ng/dj-kelblizz-storms-global-music-world-with-lyrics-support-for-artists/	This is pure churnalism. Has statements that make it clear that it is very much dependent on the subject, definitely coming from one who knows Kelblizz very well, likely himself.	Source is okay, but we can't rely on a piece that clearly fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	Does nothing but praises and promotions, not much of a WP:SIGCOV pass for the subject.	✘ No
https://sundiatapost.com/nigerian-disc-jockey-dj-kelblizz-voice-out-about-goals-to-excellence/	Another pure churnalism. Overly promotional puff.	Source is okay, but we can't rely on a piece that clearly fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	~ Ditto.	✘ No
https://thewillnews.com/why-nigerian-artistes-excel-in-global-music-than-others-in-africa-dj-kelblizz/	This one is easy, clearly an interview.	Source is okay, but we can't rely on a piece that clearly fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	This is him talking about other things, and not about himself.	✘ No
https://thenicheng.com/dj-kelblizz-strides-into-electronic-dance-music-with-driven-purpose/	Promotional puff and pure churnalism.	Source is okay, but we can't rely on a piece that is overly promotional in nature and clearly fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	not much of a WP:SIGCOV for the subject.	✘ No
https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/08/29/dj-kelblizz-nigerian-leading-dj-delivering-evablazing-sounds/	Promotional puff and pure churnalism. I also have serious suspicions here on why this was published in the newspaper on 29 August and was used in this Wikipedia article that same day.	Source is okay, but we can't rely on a piece that lacks a byline, is overly promotional in nature, and clearly fails WP:INDEPENDENT.	Ditto.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I was unsure about this one... The Nation article by "Our reporter" seems to be about what I'd expect from Nigerian media. The second Vanguard source is about the same... But he has zero listeners on Spotify [4], so I'm going with not notable. He "went viral" in 2022 per the article, but has zero listeners online. Going viral then completely dropping off the collective radar two yrs later is a bit of a stretch. Oaktree b (talk) 00:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

40k followers on youtube, but only has 3 videos, two from two yrs ago, one from 3 mths ago. Tiktok has a whole 600 followers [5]. This person isn't known to the public, simply based on the lack of social media virality. This is likely an attempt at PROMO.Oaktree b (talk) 00:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b, This subject is a Disc Jockey and not a musician, DJs are notable for the event and tour they cover, the mixes, they make for the public and in events, article meet GNG, can you see the assessment? For someone to give such assessment it means the person just wants to prove a point and all I see is that it’s a total garbage and probably this nomination isn’t assuming good faith, from the history of this article, this page was undeleted and sock was addressed, same user @Vanderwaalforces request for deletion. All the source I see are from reliable sources and independent of the subject, a lot of people have written about this subject, I don’t see any reason why the nominator calls all of the sources a promo? not all DJs drops songs on streaming platforms and social media has nothing to count for notability rather having multiple reliable sources independent of the subject. 105.116.7.104 (talk) 00:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he has no coverage in RS and his music seems to have no critical attention. He can be whatever he wants to be, but a lack of sourcing and a lack of critical notice do not add up to notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 00:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being a DJ that no one listens to, isn't notable, to be blunt. Oaktree b (talk) 00:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any song on the platform? Shows that his not a musician . Why mentioning all about social media, I suggest you check WP:NGRS 105.116.7.104 (talk) 01:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have, social media is not listed there, and we have no songs posted to any of these Nigerian sources, hence the individual is not notable. Oaktree b (talk) 01:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b, This subject is verified organically on Instagram due to Notability,The subject has 45,000 subscribers on YouTube as you mentioned here, so what makes you think the subject didn’t delete his videos on YouTube and songs from platforms? Other celebrities do that and you can’t question them, you saw no song on platforms [6], this is a DJ not a musician. 105.116.7.104 (talk) 01:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have an instagram and have posted music, that doesn't make a person notable. DJ's with a lack of sourcing and a small social media presence aren't notable here. Oaktree b (talk) 01:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this person notable then? Please present decent sourcing that talks about him, that show's he's gone viral and has attained notability. We don't have any of these and that's the issue here. Oaktree b (talk) 01:34, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

did you check the article and did you check google? I can here to read about a celebrity I’ve heard alot about and I came to see such and it’s not nice, if @Vanderwaalforces says all the source are promo then do you mean everything those reliable platforms post are promo ? All I know is that this @Vanderwaalforces needs to be blocked, I can’t come to Wikipedia to read about someone and I see things like this, like I said a celebrity can decide to take down all his songs from platforms and delete his posts from social media, other celebrities do that sir, the subject has a real verified instagram account and I’ve heard about his events so many times that’s why I came here 105.116.7.104 (talk) 01:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I will also note that in the last AfD, the arguments were made that he was "fast rising" and "up and coming"; it's been 5 years since then, if he's still "up and coming", I don't think he's important enough to get an article. Fast rising isn't taking 6 years to be at least a tiny bit notable; to argue otherwise is silly. He wasn't notable then and appears about the same now. Oaktree b (talk) 01:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Check the source if you see such, as “fast rising” because I just did and they are fine content and the subject is News worthy, ask the nominator his problem for saying all this celebrities content online are promotional, maybe he is angry that a lot of notable newspapers published this subject over time and from the sources, they are all significant coverage. 105.116.7.104 (talk) 01:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you. We'll go no further in this pointless exercise. Oaktree b (talk) 01:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Strum

AfDs for this article:

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

I don't think the sources here meet WP:NBASIC or WP:NM, save for a writing credit on Why Not Us, which is rather weak on its own. Consult the table of relevant sources in the article. Nothing in my WP:before search was of higher quality.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
Templeton, Tom (31 July 2005). "Introducing...Alexis Strum". The Guardian. Retrieved 2 September 2023.			little content outside of fluff and quotes	✘ No
Scott, Danni (5 October 2023). "'A mix-up over ice cream on Lorraine cost me my music career 20 years ago – but now I'm back'". The Metro. Retrieved 5 October 2023.	~	WP:METRO		✘ No
Strum, Alexis (23 July 2023). "I'm finally the pop star I dreamed of becoming – and I'm in my forties". The Independent. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	written by Strum	~		✘ No
Krieger, Candice (3 March 2011). "Alexis Strum lands a starring role at your fingertips". The Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved 2 September 2023.			Short article from when watching TV on phones was novel, with a few sentences of background on Strum at the end.	✘ No
Glanvill, Natalie (17 June 2015). "Kylie Minogue Songwriter to stage Homeland meets Loose Women play". Guardian Series. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	Mostly quotes or other stuff obviously sourced to Strum	?	~	✘ No
"Comic documentary about failure in development". British Comedy Guide. 15 October 2018. Retrieved 2 September 2023.	mostly quotes from Strum	~		✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Mach61 04:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Theatre, and England. Mach61 04:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Did a teeny bit more searching, noting small amount of coverage here. Mrfoogles (talk) 06:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the nomination for deletion.

Strum has co-written two songs on popular 00s albums - Come and Get it by Rachel Stevens and Still Standing by Kylie Minogue in addition to the single, Why Not Us? by Monrose.

Under Notability (music), Strum therefore qualifies under the criteria: 'Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.'

In addition, Strum is eligible for inclusion under the criteria as a performer: 'Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.' 'Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).' ('Addicted' was released by Warner Bros. major label release - https://open.spotify.com/artist/49DJil4JyZdW8Upoilkfom?si=uoQw-rvcTSOKuvGOyykJkw - her second album 'Cocoon' was also a major label recording, which was shelved and has now been released and distributed on an 'independent label with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable - https://open.spotify.com/album/7vNUTEQtnCVWel68cxx5sC?si=fMuK_Zl5Q1mgtyt1TSqOAQ and https://hmv.com/store/music/cd/cocoon)

Her listing is incomplete, but she is featured on the UK Official Charts Company website: https://www.officialcharts.com/artist/alexis-strum/

In addition, she has released two albums as a recording artist, which are widely available on all streaming platforms, with 8.3k monthly streams on Spotify.

She is also eligible for inclusion under: 'Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, such as a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article. Read the policy and notability guideline on subjects notable only for one event, for further clarifications).'

Go My Own Way was the theme tune to the 'network television show' Vital Signs (TV Show) in the UK, which aired on ITV, starring Tamzin Outhwaite.

She is also eligible for inclusion under: 'Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network.'

The music video for Bad Haircut featured Tom Ellis and was aired on The Box and MTV Hits, and has over 100,000 views on YoUTube.

She is also eligible for inclusion under: 'Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.'

The album 'Cocoon' has received a large amount of press attention since its initial planned release in 2006: - https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/music/alexis-strum---cocoon-mercury-1024671 - https://retropopmagazine.com/alexis-strum-cocoon-album-review/

Strum's music career has also been the feature of multiple, non-trivial, published works, as well as being mentioned in articles where she has been listed as a musical performer, worthy of note: - https://metro.co.uk/2023/10/04/lorraine-mix-up-destroyed-alexis-strums-career-for-20-years-19596176/ - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgl7ld1glk3o - https://www.aol.com/clean-bandit-were-told-stop-233558500.html?guccounter=1 - https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pop-star-music-alexis-strum-album-b2380472.html - https://player.winamp.com/podcasts/womans-hour-podcast-e59d55dc59 - https://www.theguardian.com/music/2005/aug/23/popandrock - https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/festival-finalises-acts-for-v-line-up-12712 - https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/13337233.kylie-minogue-songwriter-stage-homeland-meets-loose-women-play/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevebritney (talk • contribs) 13:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Smalley (bassist)

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

Article is about a bassist who is only notable for his participation in Raspberries, only one source in the article is about him directly and it is user-generated content. A google search 1 does not reveal any significant coverage that could be added to the article. Any coverage I have found in books or news only discusses him within the context of discussing the Raspberries. Per WP:MUSICBIO this artist is only notable in the context of groups he was in, so page should be deleted. 🌸wasianpower🌸 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Arizona, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Makes sense. I'm favourable to this article becoming a redirect to Raspberries. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 13:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Raspberries (band), as anything he did outside of the band is of trivial interest only, and he received no reliable media coverage in his own right. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Lee Dark

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

This article is based on interviews or publicity material in which the subject makes various claims of extraordinary musical ability and success. There are no reliable sources independent of the subject for these claims. gnu 57 18:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Sexuality and gender, and Wales. gnu 57 18:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - I have just looked on Nexis which I have access to through my university, and there are sources on there for at least part of the article. I'd be happy to go through and resolve the sourcing issues on these pages with those sources (I am going to do this now regardless). It would seem a shame to delete the article with those options around. Flatthew (talk) 18:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, clearly a number of claims in the article are not based in reality, but the article is worth a re-do. There is something here, even if it's obviously not what is outlined. Flatthew (talk) 19:16, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that a number of otherwise reliable publications appear to be taking the subject's claims at face value. The 50,000 albums sold is almost certainly false. The famous relatives are unverifiable. The audio tracks on YouTube attributed to Dark are actually studio recordings by other singers (e.g., [7][8]). I have found no indication that the subject has ever performed live, in any setting. gnu 57 10:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s an interesting point that otherwise reliable sources interview a subject and take their claims at face value when perhaps they aren’t accurate. I noticed in a Wales on Sunday article I found it was written that she performed with a band called Enigma, but there are a couple bands with that name neither of which list her as a member. But that doesn’t mean she didn’t perform with them. There’s also a CD she released but now that I think about it I couldn’t find it. So while my recommendation was ‘’’keep’’’ based on WP:RS guidance, I do have pause… Nnev66 (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is enough coverage in WP:RS for WP:GNG. Nnev66 (talk) 00:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Band of Orcs

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

This is the page for an American heavy metal band. It's been tagged for a decade as needing more references and for having some COI editing. I can't find anything online which might constitute significant coverage and nothing in the article suggests anything that would fulfill WP:MUSICBIO: they've played support slots for established bands and one of their songs was once played on a long-running UK radio rock show, but this doesn't confer notability. There's no evidence of music chart success, nor of industry awards success, no major label interest, and none of the band members is individually notable. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 11:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draško Bogdanović

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

There is only one source (a blog) in the article which discusses the subject. It says he won an award but that is unsourced. I haven't been able to find any sources that discuss him or his work in any meaningful sense. Nothing that suggests he would pass WP:PHOTOGRAPHER, or even general notability. Griboski (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Bands and musicians, Photography, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Yugoslavia, and Canada. C F A 💬 04:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I could only find more self-written profiles from things he's contributed to. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 15:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Most likely self-promo. I see little or no RS. — Sadko (words are wind) 17:30, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete sounds like WP:PROMO Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 23:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Suh

AfDs for this article:

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

Article does not present how the subject is individually notable outside of his group as per WP:BANDMEMBER. Previously nominated last year for same reason and the result of the discussion was to redirect to NCT (group). Article was re-created on August 28 but the subject of the article still doesn't have independent notability. RachelTensions (talk) 02:56, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Dance, South Korea, and Illinois. C F A 💬 04:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect back to NCT (group) Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 07:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does the addition of an 'Other Activities' section make any difference to this decision? Wikimaker17 (talk) 17:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Schiemer

AfDs for this article:

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

Last AfD was no consensus. Renominating as per previous statement: Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Most of the supplied sources are not WP:SIGCOV about him LibStar (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. LibStar (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete. Links appear when you do a basic Google search. However as per nominator, I also think those may not meet WP:SIGCOV criteria. Prof.PMarini (talk) 00:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

George Graquitena

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

BLP of a musician which I believe does not meet WP:MUSICBIO. There’s a lack of in depth coverage in reliable independent sources and most of the article is unsourced and apparently an autobio or COI editing. Mccapra (talk) 21:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Florida. Mccapra (talk) 21:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not meet any of the Notability criteria. A WP:BEFORE search does not yield results that show that the subject has been covered significantly in independent, reliable sources. There is only one site that appears to have coverage (miaminewtimes.com) but what it has are mostly trivial mentions. One of the citations on the article [[[9]]] isn't even about George Gracquitena but for Geroge Van Orsdel. As nominator mentioned, the article is mostly unsourced, either it is WP:OR or based on COI editing. Prof.PMarini (talk)

Prospero (band)

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:BAND. Has no reliable sources. Couldn't find any elsewhere. StewdioMACK (talk) 19:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:BAND #5 with two full length albums on Artoffact Records, a significant indie label that has been in operation since 1999. As usual with start class articles like this, the article does need help, but that on its own is not deletion criteria. -- t_kiehne (talk) 02:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wolfgang Jünger

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

Only source is a self published website anyone can edit. Fails WP:SIGCOV. A reasonable WP:ATD would be to redirect to Thomaskantor. 4meter4 (talk) 15:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 16:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect as per nom. No siginificant coverage in independent reliable sources found to indicate notability. The article itself only has a single line and a single source and cannot be expanded since there are no other sources. Prof.PMarini (talk) 09:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Valentin Otto

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

Completely unreferenced article. Fails WP:SIGCOV. A reasonable WP:ATD would be redirecting this to Thomaskantor. 4meter4 (talk) 15:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 16:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This talks about him for a few paragraphs, [10], but it's basically a long story detailing the position over several generations, I'm not sure he's more notable than the others listed. The lack of any kind of sourcing doesn't help trying to figure this out; one source isn't enough. Oaktree b (talk) 21:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there are a number of book sources listed in the German Wikipedia article here, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlantic306 Unfortunately they are all offline so it is impossible to assess whether or not those books have significant or superficial coverage, and the article lacks citations. The text of the German wiki article is pretty short, only mentioning the years he held the post of Thomaskantor, who was organist during that period, and who his son was. All of that could easily be included in the template at the Thomaskantor article in the notes section of Otto's entry in the template on that page. There's no reason for a separate page other than to have categories which can still be done with a redirect. 4meter4 (talk) 12:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ulrich Lange

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

Only source is a self-published website anyone can edit. It's certainly possible that this could be a notable topic, although I was unable to locate entries in standard music reference works that cover people like this such as the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians or Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. Both foreign language wiki articles are built off of the same source. A reasonable WP:ATD could be redirecting this to Thomaskantor. 4meter4 (talk) 14:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 16:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, I found mentions of him in some books:

Bach's Famous Choir, The Saint Thomas School in Leipzig, 1212-1804, devotes about a paragraph to Lange on page 22, where it's mentioned that he composed St Mark Passion which was performed into the 17th century

The Renaissance: From the 1470s to the End of the 16th Century, gives another paragraph to the subject on page 276 Microplastic Consumer (talk) 16:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the second source is only available in snippet view, so it is hard to judge the depth of coverage. The first source largely covers his contributions as Thomaskantor which could easily be used to expand that article. I'm still not convinced a separate article is needed on this person. It's borderline.4meter4 (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a screenshot from that second book. More digging found a german language source from 1920 published by the University of Illinois; Geschichte der deutschen Musik von den Anfängen bis zum Beginn des Dreissigjährigen Krieges which on page 411 discusses Lange. Monatschrift für Gottesdienst und kirchliche Kunst mentions him on page 184 as well.

Meister der Renaissancemusik an der Viadrina, Quellenbeiträge zur Geisteskultur des Nordosten Deutschlands vor dem Dreissigjährigen Kriege seems to have some info on Lange (p 78) prior to being Thomaskantor, but is just a snippet. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 18:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment same source [11] as used in my discussion for the Otto AfD (right above this one)... I'm more clear about Otto's deletion discussion than this one, I'm not sure if this person is notable or not. Otto has a lack of sourcing.Oaktree b (talk) 05:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buzy (band)

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

Failed a WP:BEFORE search; has already been de-PRODded, so here we are. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Japan. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:BAND. Four singles in the top 30 on the Oricon national chart. They also had an album at 42. Dekimasuよ! 20:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Dekimasu. I found this article. It disbanded in 2006 so most coverage is likely offline. C F A 💬 23:04, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Dekimasu and CFA. Said secondary source by the latter user pass WP:BASIC at least. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in agreement with Dekimasu --ProudWatermelon (talk) 00:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Dekimasu/WP:BAND. DCsansei (talk) 16:01, 1 September 2024 (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.

Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations

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

Created after a page move. According to WP:D2D "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead.". There is only one Wikipedia article with this wording: 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations and that page includes the two other links on this "disambiguation" page making this WP:CFORK and WP:REDUNDANT. Anyone searching for Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations will find that same information on 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations therefore the page should be redirected to 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations, the page which was renamed from Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 14:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Popular culture, and Disambiguations. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 14:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edit: since there seems to be a misunderstanding, 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations is not only about one set of allegations (1993), there is a lengthy section there about further allegations with links to all articles on Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 20:52, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edit #2: Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links makes it clear that disambiguation pages are for similarly named articles, not for associated content in completely differently named articles, as is the case with the nominated page:

"These non-article pages exist to clarify and ease confusion in cases where two or more similarly named articles exist—for example, if two or more notable people have the same name"

Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations is not a disambiguation page, just a list of links forked from 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations the creator wanted to promote. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 16:14, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There have been multiple allegations made against Michael Jackson; the 1993 allegation is only one set of them. The other allegations are covered at Trial of Michael Jackson and Leaving Neverland. When a user searches for "Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations", we don't know which set of allegations they are looking for, hence the need for disambiguation page. Disambiguation is not simply about similar article titles. Popcornfud (talk) 14:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not true that the 1993 allegation page is only about one set of allegations, it has the same content as the page I nominated and more. Do you know any disambiguation page which has an almost identical title as an existing article that already has all the links in the disambiguation page? Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that's what disambiguation was War (disambiguation) should include the links to every article about some kind of war as we don't know if the user is looking for World War II or the Hundred Years' War. Disambiguation pages are for matching titles, near matching titles or synonyms not similar subject matters. castorbailey (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a good analogy, as war is an obvious WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Popcornfud (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is about what the user sees first when searching for a term despite the term appearing in other titles. Here you argue that users should see a set of links to articles with completely different titles just in case that's what the user is thinking about. Based on this logic War (disambiguation) should include all direct links to all articles about wars. But it only has indirect links and even then only to pages which include war in the title
All pages with titles containing wars

All pages with titles containing war

All pages with titles beginning with War

castorbailey (talk) 18:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect ~~to Template:Michael Jackson.Looks like every known aspect of Jackson can be found on this template.~~ — Maile (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do we actually ever redirect to templates like that? I've never seen that done before. Popcornfud (talk) 15:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never saw disambiguation used the way you want to use it here, for articles with titles not sharing even one word or at least the meaning of the word in the disambiguation page's title.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_(disambiguation)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alligator_(disambiguation)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_(disambiguation)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_(disambiguation) Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 17:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect to a template? Not a good idea in my opinion. C F A 💬 23:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per comments below by Liz are enlightening to me. I still advocate this be turned into a redirect, but for redirect to what article, I don't know. — Maile (talk) 11:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is logical to redirect this to the article that has the same content and which used to Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations before it was renamed. TruthGuardians (talk) 14:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as proposed. The article titles are very different, there is no ambiguity here. The nominated title used to be the title of the 1993 article which has sufficient references to the two other articles. castorbailey (talk) 15:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep' per the rationale that Popcornfud has helpfully articulated. RE: Guitarjunkie22's nomination statement: disambiguation is not about the wording of the title, but the page a reader might expect for a given search term. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 17:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to wiki policy Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links it clearly is for similarly worded articles, otherwise, as I pointed out below in an example, millions of articles could exist doing nothing but listing links to associated content, where some editor could arbitrarily decide what articles he wants to associate with the title and what not. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 16:24, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a policy page, it's a wikiproject page, which is not necessarily the result of community consensus. The editing guideline for disambiguation - a better reflection of consensus - states "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead." Jonathan Deamer (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DPL WikiProject is based on WP:DISAMB their guideline starts with "First, please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Disambiguation" and WP:FIXDABLINKS ( part of WP:DISAMB) refers to DPL WikiProject for tracking dablinks. There couldn't be consensus that DPL WikiProject should track dablinks without DPL having the right idea what dab pages are and are not in the first place. You quoted WP:D2D so did I as all WP:D2D examples (Joker, Rice, Michael Dobbs) show a searched word or phrase leading to that word or phrase in the titles. It's not just DPL CAT:DABP also says "Disambiguation in Wikipedia is the process of resolving the conflicts that occur when articles about two or more different topics could have the same "natural" page title." I asked this from Popcornfud but got no response: if disambiguation is not about the titles is there an example where not one word in the dab page's title matches a word in the linked titles (as is the case here)? Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 07:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This AfD's already pretty unwieldy and I don't know if debating "what is a disambiguation page?" is going to help it reach a conclusion. I'm going to modify my above "keep" response to "keep or move" and leave it there. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 11:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this page or Move 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations for the reasons given below by PamD. This whole debate hinges on whether 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations is about all the allegations against Jackson or not, and consequently whether that's appropriately named and appropriately comprehensive.Jonathan Deamer (talk) 11:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that the editor who set up this page in the first place admitted below it was not meant to be a disambiguation page rather a set index article, which however also requires the article titles to be similar, whether Further allegations on '1993' are comprehensive enough or not, this page simply does not have a precedent or any policy under which it could exist. See MraClean's and Mr Boar1's comments below. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, we already have a section related to the sexual abuse accusations of Michael Jackson as well as Template:Michael Jackson where every topic on Michael can be found. The 1993 accusations related to the Chandlers and the later accusations in 2005 with the Arvizo family were very extensive and need separate pages to properly cover them. Anyone interest can be redirected Never17 (talk) 18:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If that's what the user expects that's what he will find after a redirect here as contrary to Popcornfud's assertion, '1993' is not only about 'the 1993' allegations. If disambiguation is not about the wording is there an example where not a word in the disambiguation page's title matches a word in the linked titles? Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 21:10, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This (and the edit to your initial post above) is disingenuous. The focus of the 1993 article is the 1993 allegations, hence the article title. There's a subsection at the end that summarises the later allegations, with links to the main articles about those allegations. Popcornfud (talk) 21:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you said it summarizes the later allegations Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations does the same thus WP:CFORK / WP:REDUNDANT. It's disingenuous to say that the 1993 article focuses on 1993 and the 490-words section about other allegations does not matter when they highlight the same allegations and links you want the user to find based on an arbitrary search term that is just one of many possible variations (Michael Jackson sex allegations, Michael Jackson sexual assault allegations, Michael Jackson sex scandals etc.) With this logic a page titled Michael Jackson's siblings could be created with this content:

Michael Jackson has multiple siblings.

Maureen Reillette "Rebbie" Jackson - American singer and the eldest child of the Jackson family of musicians.
Sigmund Esco "Jackie" Jackson - American singer and songwriter best known as a founding member of the Jackson 5
Toriano Adaryll "Tito" Jackson - American musician
Jermaine La Jaune Jackson - American singer, songwriter and bassist
La Toya Yvonne Jackson - American entertainer, singer, and dancer
Marlon David Jackson - American singer-songwriter, musician, and dancer
Steven Randall "Randy" Jackson - American singer-songwriter, musician, and dancer
Janet Damita Jo Jackson - American singer, songwriter, actress, and dancer

Then we could call it a disambiguation page because when a user searches for "Michael Jackson's siblings" we don't know which siblings they are looking for. Such a page would be deleted because it would be a fork of Jackson family , redudant and not a genuine disambiguation page. Same is true here. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 06:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We could simply redirect to the 1993 allegations and then just make that the general page for the allegations instead. Never17 (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Or revert the page move so that the 1993 page goes back to its original title. PamD 20:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Sexuality and gender. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support a redirect I agree with the nominator's reasoning. According to WP:D2D, disambiguation is necessary when a word or phrase might lead a reader to more than one existing Wikipedia article. Should be redirected to 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations, which exited first and have all of the same information already. TruthGuardians (talk) 19:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, or Move the 1993... article back to the base title. Either there are other non-1993 allegations on which wikipedia has content, in which case the dab page is justified (ie the "trial" article: not sure about the film), or the 1993 article covers all allegations in which case it should not have been moved and should be moved back. I know nothing much about Michael Jackson, but I do know that dab pages should be logical. PamD 07:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree both should not exist at the same time as there is clear overlap between them. MraClean (talk) 18:31, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations per the nominator and WP:D2D. or revert the recent page move of 1993 Michael Jackson's sexual abuse allegations per PamD. Someone searching for Michael Jackson sex abuse allegations or Michael Jackson allegations or any other variation of the subject will find all those articles in the search result on wiki anyway, don't see why there should be a dedicated page for the term "Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations".MraClean (talk) 18:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All of those pages should redirect to Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations. Popcornfud (talk) 22:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point is there are no such pages and shouldn't be, it would be unnecessary. Anyone searching for any of those phrases, including Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations, finds all three articles in the search results. There is no need for a new page just to show the same links which are the top results anyway. MraClean (talk) 18:56, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect It's WP:CFORK, it's just a shorter version of 1993's further allegations section and I never saw a dab page like this. Leaving Neverland is an article about the film with that title, this makes it look like that's where the accusers made the allegations. Should this page contain a link to an article about their original accusations in their lawsuit, if one existed? And if it did should then Leaving Neverland be removed from the list and if not should other films covering the same topic listed too? Then why stop at films, why not include links to articles about books on the same subject. This is not what disambiguation pages are for. 2BOARNOT2B (talk) 22:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You sure seem to have strong opinions on Wikipedia policies for an editor with only four previous edits (two of them to another Michael Jackson debate). Popcornfud (talk) 22:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's WP:PA, not an answer to my questions. I've been an editor since 2021, I just changed my username. You edited in far more Jackson debates than myself does that make your knowledge of wiki policies less accurate? I've seen countless disambiguation pages, there is nothing like this one among them. It has the same stuff as the Further allegations on 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations therefore WP:CFORK. There is no logic in why those 3 links should have a dedicated page. We could put the link and summary of every wiki article that has something about the allegations (Square One, Neverland Firsthand , FBI Files, Michael Jackson's Dangerous Liaisons, Michael Jackson's Boys etc.) say they are "associated with the Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations" but that is just not what disambiguation pages are for. As I see Robertsky says this is not a dabpage either, you changed the {Set index article} tag to {Disambiguation} after an editor pointed out that the titles are different thus WP:SETINDEX does not apply. You need similar titles to make this either a disamb or a sex index page. Those are the rules. 2BOARNOT2B (talk) 21:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: After four years, I have closed thousands of AFD discussions and have never closed one, or seen an AFD discussion closed by another admin, that resulted in a Redirect from main space to template space. I don't think that cross-namespace redirects (at least main space->template) are permitted. If you are advocating a different redirect target article, like a main space article, please specify the article by providing a link to it, just don't just say "Redirect" without mentioning the redirect target article. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They're not covered by R2, but I don't think I've ever seen one in the wild. I think it would be strange to arrive at a template as a reader. C F A 💬 12:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Several editors have suggested redirecting the broader title Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations to the more specific title 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations, ie from a general to a more specific title. If the 1993 article is indeed the appropriate place to redirect the general title, then it should be moved back to that general title, from which it was moved, rather than leave a redirect from a general to a narrow title. PamD 14:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 1993 article is not an overview page about all the allegations in general. The focus is the 1993 allegations, hence the title. I can't stress this enough.

Read through the three different pages in question here (or just their leads) and I hope the difference in focus between them will be clear. Popcornfud (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You may stress that but it won't change the fact that there is a 490-words section for further allegations on 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations including the same links you want to promote with Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations. All the later page does is cheerypick links you want to get extra attention. A user searching for the term Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations will find everything on 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegation. All he has to do is click on the same links there. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 16:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is immensely frustrating. Instead of responding to comments, the nominator is repeatedly updating their initial nom with "edits" supposedly "clarifying" things, which repeatedly resets the starting position of the debate in their favor. I do not, as the most recent edit alleges, wish to "promote" anything on Wikipedia. Please give this nonsense a rest. Popcornfud (talk) 16:18, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does not reset the starting position as my position did not change at all. I put those edits there instead of in comments because I didn't want to spam the voting sections informing everyone about that policy. You started an RFC to change the title of the article only to create this one redefining what disambiguation pages are. Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 16:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I did not create the page Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations, which is under discussion here. That was created by @Robertsky. The previous page by that title was moved after a discussion which received no opposing votes. Almost everything you're adding to this debate is just untrue. Popcornfud (talk) 20:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You know well what I meant by created. Robensky merely moved the page after the RFC that you started following a sock puppet's proposal to rename the page and then it was you who built it along with the sock puppet and an editor exposed for using reddit to try to get more attention for the allegations. Otherwise what was untrue what I said here? Guitarjunkie22 (talk) 23:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't know if updating the nom is worse than WP:BLUDGEONING but it's useful to include all relevant policies behind a nom.Guitarjunkie22 next time please gather all your evidence before nominating.MraClean (talk) 19:39, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the 1993 article. Dabpages are about matching titles. In a previous edit where I accidentally linked to a disambiguation page I got an automatic warning from DPL WikiProject that "Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles." Titles here are entirelly different. If this page is not redirected then all links to Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations in all articles will be, by definition, a dablink. There are 5 expections under WP:INTDABLINK where intentional links to a dabpages is appropriate, none of it is true here. PinkSlippers (talk) 23:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep when I created this after the page was moved, it was intended to be a set index article, not a dab page. If there's any confusion, I apologize for that. – robertsky (talk) 05:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But this can't be a set index article either as Wikipedia:Set index articles list things only of one type and the same/similar names. There is a table on WP:SIA that clarifies this: How to tell whether the page could be a set index article: similar names / similar subject. The example of WP:SIA is Dodge Charger, where all linked articles have similar names. The footer of the the page you created also says This article includes a list of related items that share the same name (or similar names). . But Trial of Michael Jackson Leaving Neverland and 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations obviously are not same or similar names. MraClean (talk) 12:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the 1993 page as per nomination. The existence of this page serves no purpose whatsoever and should be redirected to 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations. Wikipedia encourages editors to avoid redundant articles that cover the same topic. Instead, efforts should be made to improve and expand a single, comprehensive article, but the 1993 allegations article is already that. Wikipedia discourages "content forking," where content is split into multiple articles to present different viewpoints or variations on the same topic. Instead, different perspectives should be integrated into a single article, following Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. The existence of this article breaks with this. Finally, if there are multiple articles on closely related or exact same subjects that do not warrant their own pages, they may be merged or redirected. This helps prevent fragmentation of information across several minor articles. This article will only get redirected in the future anyway to prevent Wikipedia clutter. NE0mAn7o! (talk) 05:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations: there's nothing in the disambiguation page that's not in the that article. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as proposed by nominator to the 1993 article. This is an interesting debate but as the page creator himself admitted above it was not meant to be a WP:DISAMB page He says it is WP:SIA, however the different article titles do not allow it to be a WP:SIA either, there is no wiki policy under which this page can exist. Keeping it would just create a precedent to create similar pages of arbitrarly selected link lists associated with a topic. The 1993 article is a good starting point for this subject anyway, it has summaries of the other allegations too.Mr Boar1(talk) 20:20, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warm Dust

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

The sources listed here provide little more than WP:ROUTINE coverage of the band. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the group has released records on three notable record labels, BASF, Trend, Uni. Plus they have two notable members, Alan King and Paul Carrack.
Karl Twist (talk) 07:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not WP:INHERITED, saying a band is notable because it was involved in notable things is almost the definition of this, although these may be a good place to look for sources. Allan Nonymous (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most times when there are two or more notable people in a band that's a consideration of notability. Another consideration is that the band or artist has had two record albums released on two notable record labels. So using the Inherited thing is not really right. And this band would be triply notable if I could get hold of the continental rock magazines and books because that's where they were more popular. If you have a look in the Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Warm Dust section, you can see that I have dropped in a link. They made a splash when they were seen by Pope Paul VI. (I think that was the correct Pope)
Karl Twist (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Allan Nonymous Karl is making valid arguments under WP:BAND#c5 and c6. That isn't an absolute case against deletion, but it isn't fallacious. Mach61 13:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I might look again later but there's this (page 13) in Disc and Music Echo. A lot of what I'm finding merely mentions the band once. toweli (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Toweli, Hi thanks for the Disc and Music Echo "Warm Dust `back' Lennon" article link. That got me searching and I've found a few more articles now. I found the Record Mirror, October 9, 1971 article "Warm Dust slam the British mass media" on page 23, Melody Maker, July 25, 1970, News in Brief, Warm Dust section, Page 35, Melody Maker, May 1, 1971 "No Dust on peace show" article on Page 4, and the Melody Maker, January 30, 1971 article, War, Peace and Warm Dust article by Andrew Means on Page 11. So we have five articles on the group plus there's other stuff in newspaper archives that I can't access. One has to subscribe to them.
Cheers Karl Twist (talk) 12:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; in response to my above comment defending Karl, I note again that WP:NMUSIC is not absolute (conversely, meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept). Aside from the stunt with Pope John, this band seems to be a footnote in the Paul Carrack story; I can't find anything usable for WP:GNG purposes, nor even WP:RS that go into enough depth for me to think this article should stick around. An article should never have to rely on unreliable blogs or be composed of facts from a bunch of miscellanious stray mentions in RS, which is all this band has. Mach61 19:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closing admin, Even though I believe there's enough on Warm Dust to warrant a keep, could I ask please that if a consensus eventually leans towards a deletion, you might consider the option of redirecting rather than deleting? This way we can preserve the history and links. There are a number of possibilities. There is Paul Carrack in his Career section, Ace, and there's Alan King etc. Thanks. Karl Twist (talk) 07:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Karl Twist we can't really do that, see WP:XY Mach61 12:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we can. It's done all the time and there is already a section for the Warm Dust group on Carrack's page. I didn't make it. Karl Twist (talk) 12:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or redirect--He's always been dismissive of them, but brief mentions of the band have appeared in RS on Carrack for five decades. A 1982 Rolling Stone profile mentions that their "major [sic] to fame was a psychedelic antiwar LP". The only early 1970s things I found were short articles or reviews in Kensington and Chelsea News, Daily Post (Liverpool), and The Oregon Journal. Caro7200 (talk) 11:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because of the sources linked by Karl Twist. toweli (talk) 15:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in view of the sources identified in this discussion by Karl Twist and Caro 7200 including reliable newspapers and magazines that together enable a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's sufficient coverage now referenced to evidence the notability of the subject and to sustain an article. Good work by @Karl Twist. ResonantDis_tortion 12:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply, @ResonantDistortion:, thanks. It was a bit of a job. It was @Toweli: with the Disc and Music Echo "Warm Dust `back' Lennon" article link. That got me keen to find more. I realize that I needed to search deeper. And then I found stuff that I had missed. Cheers
  Karl Twist (talk) 08:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Term is apparently used in astronomy, that's all Gbooks brings up. I don't find any sources otherwise, and what's been presented is brief mentions. Oaktree b (talk) 14:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, Just a post to show where I'm up to so far as per the table below.

Update so far
Publication	Date	Page	Title	Notes	Link
Disc and Music Echo	June 6, 1970	13	Warm Dust `back' Lennon	article about Warm Dust	link
Melody Maker	July 25, 1970	35	News in Brief, Warm Dust	Warm Dust section in article 92 w	link
Melody Maker	January 30, 1971	11	War, Peace and Warm Dust by Andrew Means	article about Warm Dust	link
Melody Maker	May 1, 1971	Page 4	No Dust on peace show	article about Warm Dust	link
Record Mirror	October 9, 1971	23	Media Apathy, Warm Dust slam the British mass media	article about Warm Dust	link
Beat Instrumental	April 1972	14	Profile Alan Solomon	Profile on Warm Dust saxophonist, keyboard player. A good deal of it is about Warm Dust	link
Sunday Mirror	Sunday 08 November 1970	19	White Hope for Today	article about Warm Dust and their white poppy stunt	link
Record Mirror	May 16, 1970	14	New Albums, WARM DUST: Warm Dust (Trend TNLS 700)	review on Warm Dust album, And It Came To Pass mistakenly referred to as Warm Dust	link
Record Mirror	December 26, 1970	Page 15	Mirrorpick/LPs, WARM DUST: "Peace For Our Time." - Trend 6480 001]	review on Peace for Our Time album	link
Record Mirror	April 24, 1971	Page 18	Mirrorpick, PETER JONES ON THE NEW SINGLES, WARM DUST: It's A Beautiful Day (Trend)	short review by Peter Jones on Warm Dust single, "It's a Beautiful Day"	link

OK, the first seven in the table are articles about Warm Dust. There's another one in the British Newspaper archive but I can't read the title. All reliable sources. I may have a look around later to see if I can fine more.
Cheers Karl Twist (talk) 09:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aurora Gonin Musume

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

The only source I found on Google was already in the article. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Japan. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it does not meet WP:GNG. Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A short search shows there should be a merge and redirect to Otaku no Seiza: An Adventure in the Otaku Galaxy. The group was based on/represented the characters in the game. There are also sources in Japanese, such as an article in Kinema junpō; I don't know if adding something like that is really necessary for a merge, but WP:BEFORE would also indicate searching for Japanese sources in this case. Dekimasuよ! 00:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dekimasu Unfortunately, my monolinguism limits my ability to assess sources in Japanese. I don't nominate articles with plenty of non-English sources because of this. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 01:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'merge and redirect' I agree with the above argument.--ProudWatermelon (talk) 00:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shwa Losben

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

The only coverage of the subject in reliable sources that I was able to find is this 2009 NBC Philadelphia article. toweli (talk) 18:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, California, and Washington, D.C.. toweli (talk) 18:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to non-notability. No significant coverage in independent, reliable sources found. The award listed is non-notable award-giving body. Prof.PMarini (talk) 13:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:43, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No significant coverage. Not notable enough. Priscilladfb16 (talk) 06:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fasl-ı Cedid

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

Probably need a native speaker to figure out whether this is notable from sources such as http://bodrumkoro.org/cevdetcagla.html Chidgk1 (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I was able to find sources like [12] and [13] that mention the subject; also many other reliable sources point out that Santuri Hilmi Bey, the person considered to be the representative of this musical ensemble (or style) is the grandfather of the composer of the current Turkish national anthem, Osman Zeki Üngör. I believe there is a plausible potential to find more sources if we could search the offline archives or books, based on the references given for the subject in these kinds of academic papers. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 03:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alejandra Villarreal

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

See also the article’s Talk page. This should be a basic redirect to The Warning (band) but I suspect it will be contested so I’m bringing it here for consensus. I am very familiar with The Warning and wrote a sizeable chunk of their article, but Alejandra simply has not achieved any individual notability outside of the band, per the requirements of WP:BANDMEMBER and WP:NOTINHERITED. This article merely repeats info from the band article plus some fan trivia, and rather desperately tries to beef things up with more trivia about her gear. Note that Alejandra’s sister/bandmate Paulina Villarreal also has her own article, but that one is a bit stronger because Paulina has earned notice from pro drumming publications. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Mexico. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article should stand and not be deleted.

Just because a musician is known for being a member of a band should not regulate them the band's article only.

This article should stand as a marker to add notes to, concerning further achievements Alejandra will make in the future. 174.165.130.146 (talk) 08:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the "WP" policies linked above. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that, to date, Alejandra has only achieved success in collaboration with her sisters. Deleting this page, removes any place for specific personal and equipment information which would not be appropriate in a band page. Phil1107 (talk) 00:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That statement is self-contradictory, because if she has no individual achievements then that's exactly why she shouldn't have her own article. Calling for an article that only contains non-notable trivia for possible future purposes violates several different policies that can be found at WP:NOT. The discussion at Talk:Alejandra Villarreal shows much better awareness of the relevant policies. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:43, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom. toweli (talk) 19:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom. The article reads like a fan site, noting the specific guitars used for specific performances as if they have great historical significance. She didn't use the Hendrix 'Star-Spangled Banner' guitar at the opening of the Woodstock II. The entry contains excess unattributed trivial knowledge. I agree with nom, does not meet WP:BANDMEMBER, and lacks WP:SIGCOV. —Ventric (talk) 13:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Fleeting Ends

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

Not seeing anything that would make this a pass under WP:BAND. No in depth reviews, charting records or significant awards or recognition. Mccapra (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Pennsylvania. Mccapra (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Gibson (Christian musician)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson (Christian musician) (2nd nomination)

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

I propose this article for deletion because there are many, many, many "sources" but which are often profiles and biographies sometimes written by the artist himself and anonymous users, the sourcing is horrible and it is difficult to find your way around, if the article is eligible it is absolutely necessary to rework the sourcing, I tried to improve it, but... SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 23:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also a lot of these "sources" come from databases like AllMusic, are there any press articles or better quality elements? SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 01:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have applied {{subst:afd2}} to this nomination, which did not previously have the full AfD formatting. No opinion or comment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Military, Christianity, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep has had a No.1 hit album and other hits on Billboards Top Christian Albums chart and also has coverage in album reviews on reliable sources such as AllMusic and CrossRythmns. Also this is significant coverage with a byeline here, and also here. The article can be rewritten or shortened but AfD is not for clean-up purposes, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 18:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Atlantic306, I am not against keeping the article and you may be right about the non-necessity of this Afd, I could not find where I could make this type of request. But in the current state the article should be put back in draft and be republished later when a sorting of sources will be done because the article is hardly clear in the current state SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 09:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, although it happens articles older than 6 months are not supposed to be moved to draft so if it is kept it needs to be fixed while in mainspace, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sourcing on this article is a mess. Far, far too many citations to sources that don't help with notability, which makes assessing it very difficult. I have gone through every single reference and found exactly one that in my opinion shows notability: Soultracks bio, which looks like an independent and in-depth biography. Doing a search, I have found: Hot Hits book, a little snippet; Charisma and Christian Life, a frustratingly obscured piece that looks to be mostly about an album but I can't be sure. The second source Atlantic306 has noted is an interview, which cannot contribute to notability (sorry).

In short, based on the sources I could find, delete. It feels like there should be enough RS somewhere out there, but they're not in the article and I can't find enough to say keep. Atlantic306, do you have access to any offline sources that are pushing you towards keep? He seems like he ought to be notable...maybe some of his albums are notable and we could redirect? StartGrammarTime (talk) 07:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't have access to any offline sources but there are quite a few book results in a google search which I cant assess unfortunately as either its a small snippet given or none at all. Reviews of his music do count towards notability so I would include the reviews on CrossRythmns and on AllMusic (the paragraph ones, not the single sentence ones), imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: SparklingBlueMoon, why is this AFD called Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson (Christian musician) (2nd nomination) when there has been no Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson (Christian musician) nor a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Gibson? Why is this the 2nd nomination? Was there a previous AFD under a different page title? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Liz, when I tried to make the nomination manually a message told me that there had already been a result before but it is not impossible that it was an error. SparklingBlueMoon (talk) 22:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need some more opinions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elvish Yadav

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability issue. Winning one show and couple of music videos are not enough. Xegma(talk) 05:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, Television, Internet, and Haryana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that the 50 ish refs do make the subject pass WP:NBASIC, could you specify the guideline that you are using to determine if they are notable or not? Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 12:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notability for WP:GNG is determined by significant coverage in multiple reliable sources and that is already demonstrated by the references in the article including many newspaper articles, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom, almost half of the refs are about Bigg Boss OTT. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 18:21, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Clearly appears to be the subject of much third-party coverage from reviewing the sources. StewdioMACK (talk) 20:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Viva Van

AfDs for this article:

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

Article deleted by consensus last month; G4 Speedy contested. Additional sources added by contester still don't appear to meet GNG as they are either results/routine coverage or interviews with the subject. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Music, Wrestling, and California. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Viva Van is currently active with AEW/ROH, the previous discussion was relisted however it was deleted before any additional discussion could take place, I've added an article from the Miami Herald, as well as several Fightful Select, Post Wrestling etc. links which we use on several pages concerning independent wrestlers. I think her role in the CMLL Women's championship match against Willow Nightingale is a good example of notability. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:59C0:5620:58ED:634F:B3D5:5673 (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Same reasoning as my !vote a month or so ago, just not enough to show notability. Match reports are about all that come up. Oaktree b (talk) 00:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Creator of the article here, my reasoning is similar to that of Thief-River-Faller. She makes recurring appearances in AEW/ROH (even if only as an "enhancement talent"), and has made appearances for both of Mexico's main promotions, AAA (appearing at their main event of the year, Triplemanía, in 2023) and CMLL (the aforementioned women's championship match involving Willow Nightingale), and as a result has been subject of articles from mainstream publications such as the Miami Herald. EdgarCabreraFariña (talk) 11:29, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Just last month. a previous AFD closed as Delete so I think the discussion would benefit from a little more time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:19, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I've added more sources to the article where she is the primary topic. One source is Pro Wrestling Illustrated, which is a generally reliable source on WikiProject Pro Wrestling's list of sources, as well as an interview conducted by Denise Salcedo. Salcedo is an employee of Wrestling Observer Newsletter and Fightful, both of which are considered reliable sources by the aforementioned list. These new sources, in addition to sources already in the article, help her clear WP:SIGCOV criteria. CeltBrowne (talk) 21:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interviews of the subject cannot be used to meet WP:GNG due to not being independent of the subject. Both of the sources you added were interviews with the subject. I'm still not seeing anything in the article which indicates the subject has met GNG in the month since the last article was deleted (which, if this is kept, should be undeleted and attributed to, since I don't think there was much different). ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 21:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As I pointed, my main concern is the sources. Wrestlers need reliable sources focusing on them. Most of the article is just WP:RESULTS, that means, reports about TV shows where she worked, but the report is not about her. We can use Cagematch and create articles for every wrestler on the planet, that's why we need to include sources about the wrestler. For example, AEW section has 5 sources, 4 of them, WP:RESULTS. ROH section has 1 source, which is WP:RESULTS (Her ROH career isn't notable). Impact Wrestling has one source, WP:RESULTS. Almost every match on the Independent Circuit it's WP:RESULTS (I don't get why her work with Hoodslam it's relevant at all). We can't just take matches from famous promotions to create an article. On the other side, it's fine to read articles from Denice or Miami Herald about her. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Denice interview has too little secondary context to base a BLP article off of it, especially so since in this instance it's published on The Sportster which is redlisted at WP:RS/PS#Valnet and specifically listed as unreliable at WP:PW/RS. The PWI interview is literally just the raw interview on YouTube. Even if we count Miami Herald, that's still one source. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bowie Jane

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

fails WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 01:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Television. Joeykai (talk) 01:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Law, Australia, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, passes WP:GNG per these sources [14][15][16][17] which give fairly significant coverage to the subject. There are also other sources available that when combined further their notability for an article. Ednabrenze (talk) 08:45, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, source 8 above is a brief album review in Billboard (fine I guess), the rest are about the season of Big Brother and mention this person in relation to the others on the show. Not exactly significant coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 18:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: to the Big Brother season? Seems to have survived long enough on the show, but I'm not sure they're notable outside of that context. Doesn't seem to meet musical notability requirements either. The Billboard review is fine, but it's used for musical notability, then we go onto the TV show sources; you have to pick one sort of notability, you can't stack them. Being almost notable as a DJ and almost notable as a TV personality don't add up to an article here. I'm not fussed if this gets !deleted either. Oaktree b (talk) 18:28, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, hopefully we'll see more participation. Also, to the nominator, in the future, please provide a more comprehensive deletion rationale that demonstrates BEFORE has been done.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources I added.

Sources:

Gorman, Brigid O (23 April 2013). "Barrister's a secret singing sensation". Lawyers Weekly. Retrieved 1 September 2024.
"Meet Bowie Jane". VoyageLA (Interview). 5 April 2021.
Doreian, Robyn (25 August 2013). "All out, all change". Lifestyle. The Sun-Herald. Sydney: Fairfax Media. p. 12. Retrieved 1 September 2024. While studying law and commerce at Deakin University, she played covers at restaurants in an acoustic duo. Once qualified, the flip side to courtrooms was laser-lit gigs at venues like Transport, at Melbourne's Federation Square, where she blasted her energetic originals. And in 2013, she sang at the Australian Open tennis tournament. The moniker Bowie Jane came from her nickname - ever since she was a child, she's worn glittery bows in her hair. It was also how she kept her alter ego hidden from colleagues and clients. ... In March, she shelved four years of law practice and moved to London to become a star.

Bad Boy

"Dance Club Songs". Billboard. 13 October 2018. Retrieved 1 September 2024.

I also found this unreliable law profile source, with her real name:

"Miranda Ball". Meldrum's List. Retrieved 1 September 2024. The law profile notes: "Miranda's experience is extensive having run high profile White Collar Crime Litigations as both a Partner then Barrister. Her recent work includes the Bernie Madoff litigations in Bermuda & the UK, Operation Wickenby, Australian Crime Commission investigations and examinations, Special Leave Applications to the High Court of Australia, Legal Professional Privilege Claims, Constitutional Challenges, Children's Court hearings, Australian Taxation Office litigations/investigations and Coronial Inquests."

There is sufficient coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, plus the sources identified by @Ednabrenze to allow the subject to pass the general notability guideline, requiring "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." --Yours sincerely, Bas (or TechGeek105) (talk to me) 06:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians

Bands and musicians

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Categories

References