- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
nn musician, gets less than 100 unique hits on google Renosecond 00:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:MUSIC, also has no sources. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 00:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment He appears to have recorded with Nurse with Wound. If that band is notable, then so is he. Jcuk 08:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- So, we're supposed to guess? Thanks. Tychocat 09:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Notability by association is interesting, but only suggests to me that Pathak should be merged with Nurse with Wound, since Pathak himself fails WP:MUSIC. (Note: I am not standing on judgement about Nurse with Wound.) Pathak lacks multiple non-trivial articles by third parties, shows no charted hits, no national tours. I verify 75 distinct Ghits out of 203 general hits, which speaks to his notability at this level. Also note most of Pathak's Ghits are related to Nurse with Wound, not his own stuff, which further suggests lack of notability. Tychocat 09:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
*Neutral - as someone who has been involved in the Nurse with Wound article and several related entries, this bio comes as something of a surprise. Stapleton was of the impression that Pathak had retired from music and, the last time they met, Pathak was running a hi-fi shop in London (this is all in David Keenan's book on NWW, Coil and Current 93 btw). I'm a little sceptical on the veracity of this article as it fails to note Pathak's immediate post-NWW activity (I'm not giving the name away here, makes it too easy....) but if sources can be provided, I'll say keep. Can't find anything myself. Possible hoax? Ac@osr 14:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- SCRATCH THAT - not a hoax but a straight copy-vio. [1] The rules state this must be deleted on that basis alone. Ac@osr 14:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm kind of excited to hear he's back tho'. A clean trail for 25 years then he re-emerges? That's got to be newsworthy in the appropriate circles.....Ac@osr 14:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Not notable, so delete. FairHair 17:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete {{db-band}} in future, is also copyvio so should be removed immediatly. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 01:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I have now flagged the article as copyvio. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 02:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:MUSIC. BlueValour 01:50, 5 September 2006 (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.