Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Infinite Loop

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:21, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One Infinite Loop

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

Article was nominated for A7 deletion by Overmage but was removed by one-edit SPA, 24.216.248.28 (talk · contribs). Article was then PRODed by Semitransgenic but the PROD was removed by another one-edit SPA, 24.216.247.40 (talk · contribs). Both IPs are from the same city and use the same ISP ([1][2])Probable socking aside, I believe that the subject of the article, a composer, fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:ARTIST, and WP:MUSIC.

Article has four references. One is to Discogs.com, a source that I do not feel can be used to establish notability. The second and third are primary sources, lists of bands playing at a seemingly non-notable festival called Norcal Noisefest. As they're primary and do not constitute independent or significant coverage, they can't be used to establish notability. The fourth is a website called Bandcamp.com that seems to be selling the subject's product (I'm having trouble even pulling it up). A retailer isn't independent and there's no significant coverage on the page. In short, in my opinion, none of the current references on in the article can be used to establish notability.

A Google News search that excludes any reference to Apple (the street its HQ is located), returns no results. A similar Google News Archive search also produces no hits for the subject in the first three pages of results. A Google News search and Google News Archive search for the subject of the article's real name, also provide no coverage of the subject of this article.

All external links are not independent and cannot be used to establish notability. Author of the page, Pinecone23777 (talk · contribs) in an SPA whose edits suggest that they're attempting to promote the subject of the article on Wikipedia wherever possible. I can find no connection between the author and the subject of this article. OlYeller21^Talktome 21:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not notable.Hairhorn (talk) 23:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn, fails WP:ARTIST and WP:MUSIC

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - no in-depth coverage found in independent, reliable sources for this project; does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. Gongshow ^Talk 06:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per WP: A7. The CSD tag should have been reinstated, as there was no reason to remove the CSD tag. I am sure that this is some sort of sockpuppeting case. I will warn both IPs with level 1 warning for removing speedy deletion tags. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 17:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to try to stop you but a connection hasn't been proven. Even if it had, the user seems intent on creating a page and they (if socking was proven), have shown that they're willing to subvert our policies. I brought the subject to AfD so that the issue would be settled. I can't fault anyone for calling duck, though. OlYeller21^Talktome 18:23, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. It has no coverage in WP:RS and thus fails WP:GNG and also WP:MUSBIO. →TSU ^tp* 17:30, 13 June 2012 (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.