Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
(Redirected from Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Musicians)
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

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:
  1. 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.
  2. 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.


Purge page cache watch
Related deletion sorting


Bands and musicians

edit

Aresh Banaji

edit
Aresh Banaji (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable music engineer - at best a background person who has no significant coverage anywhere other than their name appearing as a passing mention (ie. "my assistant" and as a title in print) COOLIDICAE🕶 17:01, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Damaś

edit
Damaś (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:MUSIC, and the majority of sources are directly connected to the subject. Electricmemory (talk) 01:21, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I know you are fluent in Polish. Could you please search for more sources on this? Thanks.4meter4 (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Minogue Band

edit
Annie Minogue Band (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a band, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. As always, bands are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show passage of certain defined notability criteria supported by reliable sources -- but the strongest notability claim here is that one of their music videos won a minor award that isn't significant enough to pass NMUSIC #8.
Otherwise, this is strictly on the level of "band whose music exists", and is referenced mainly to primary sources, directory entries and a Q&A interview in which Annie Minogue is answering questions about herself, which are not support for notability -- and the few reliable sources left (one relatively short album review and two articles from minor magazines that read suspiciously more like mildly-rewritten press releases from her record label rather than GNG-building journalism) doesn't add up to enough to claim that she would pass GNG.
Further, the creator started this in draftspace and submitted it for review several times, but it's been declined each time for the inadequacy of its sourcing, following which they submitted it for the fifth or sixth time on August 13, and then made no further edits before coming back today to move it into mainspace themselves without waiting for the latest review they had submitted it for, which is not proper process.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the band from needing better, more GNG-worthy referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:20, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good day @Bearcat,
Thanks for your feedback.
As a new editor to Wikipedia, I have really appreciated the feedback given by some editors on this platform.
After the last review by @HilssaMansen19, who contributed to the article also with 2 further sources and were extremely helpful with actual suggestions on how to improve this article, which I did, I was confident that this article was ready to be published.
I realize that I have not followed the proper process here, so what would be the next steps?
Thank-you Van1985 (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Hi @Van1985, I'd be open to !voting to move this back to draft space, but my concern is that the band doesn't meet WP's notability criteria for musicians, and the draft won't ever make it through AfC.
Are you able to have a read over the criteria and let us know which points you think the band may meet? This will help other editors come to a decision in this discussion. Thanks, Nil🥝 20:32, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is not a vote as I initially declined this article and edited it later per conversation with @Van1985 on my talk page. I came here because of this mention. They are a new editor, and surely, not aware of Wikipedia:Canvassing as they asked for motivation and for guidance. Agf, for a new editor not being aware of the policies is common.
Including that, I initially declined it as a draft as explained in the conversation linked above. I did advise for being patient about the process and to seek another reviewer to review the draft. I believe there is some sort of notability. As mentioned in the detailed nomination by @Bearcat about awards, I found a source mentioning some notable awards - even if considered minor, Telly awards, National Award, WSA award 's may present minor notability. On non-famous charts like World Indie Charts and European Indie Music Charts, they have peaked at #1 and #2 respectively. #1 two times maybe. [1]
Per NMUSIC #5, their album record label is a major label Varèse Sarabande and tied up with others (independent, known and old) on digital release of singles or album. Per NMUSIC #11, will their broadcast of songs on national television be considered? Along with an independent feature film, their music has been featured on television shows like Dawson’s Creek and Strong Medicine as another criteria met.
Still, if that might not be sufficient, since there is no page on Annie Minogue, or members like Brian Karp Letters to Cleo's former member, I am suggesting to draftify the article and then redirect it to Annie Minogue (will suggest the editor and help edit it) would save both the article per Wikipedia:ATD, though an old band but let's consider Wikipedia:Too soon given they are releasing a new album and have been releasing singles recently. HilssaMansen19Irien1291S • spreading wiki love ~ Message here; no calls 20:51, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When it comes to charting, the only thing we accept as a notability-making chart is an IFPI-certified national chart on the order of Billboard or the Official UK Charts, not "non-famous charts like World Indie Charts and European Indie Music Charts". And even when it comes to "the albums are on a label", it's not the fact of being released by a label that confers notability, which would allow some bands to bypass having to have any sourcing: it's the question of whether the albums got GNG-building coverage about their release and reception in reliable sources.
Basically, everything in NMUSIC always has to be supported by reliable source coverage about the achievement, and nothing in it ever confers any automatic inclusion freebies on a band who haven't been shown to pass GNG on their sourceability. It's not the claim that makes the band notable, it's the quality and depth and volume of GNG-worthy sourcing that media devoted to reporting on it. Bearcat (talk) 23:27, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the context Hilssa. I'm still not quite comfortable that WP:NMUSIC has been met, but would support draftifying. Looking at the criteria you've alluded to:
  • NMUSICBIO #2 (charting) – "World/European Indie Music Charts" are not ones I'm familiar with, and is not listed at WP:CHARTS. The only place I've found where it's parent has been discussed is here, but there isn't consensus that it's reliable.
  • NMUSICBIO #8 (awards) – A good rule of thumb is that if an award doesn't have it's own Wikipedia article, it is unlikely to be considered notable. Having a Google of the Telly Awards also raises concerns. Unsure what some of the other awards listed in that article are as no presenter/context is given to them. The ASCAP Pop Music Awards seems the most notable of the bunch, but would need RS that they received it.
  • NMUSIC #5 (major label releases) – Searching Varèse Sarabande albums discography shows only one release, but the criteria requires two or more. One could argue semantics over what a "major label" is, but either way sigcov is required for all releases to meet this criteria.
  • NMUSIC #11 – Featuring on a soundtrack isn't enough for notability; this criteria is about receiving significant radio play.
Also noting that the criteria only indicates a band may be notable; significant coverage from reliable sources is still required to pass SNG. For that reason, I'd say draftify is best for the time being. Nil🥝 23:37, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Nil NZ for the detailed reply and @Bearcat for yours. I also agree with your points and found several articles but RS are needed. It will be hard to pass AFC but I will try to add more sources (if they exist) and work on it if draftified.
NewTimes RS mentioning ASCAP award (bad writing style/format but The New Times (Rwanda) is RS per Wikipedia:WikiProject AfroCine/Reliable Sources. @Nil NZ, idk if one would be enough apart from PlasticMagazine one.
Adding this - They won National artist of the year at LA Music Awards, a notable regional award (more like an unique award type).
Additionally, it turns out EIMN is a big network and the leading continental indie chart (not on Wikipedia as an article but mentioned in songs/bands/singers articles as an achievement chart like Billboard) There are several global news mentions available of the charts as well. Some minor mentions -[2]
[Italian Network] available on [3], mentions Annie Minogue Band.
Another topic:
What are your thoughts and suggestions on "Anne Minogue" article @Bearcat and @Nil NZ? As far as I could find a few hours back while writing that, she had a solo career, two Albums (early or pre 2000s magazines found confirming it), songs probably but much of her solo work is pre-Internet and it would be hard to find old prints, if they do exist in e-format like archives. There is coverage of her 4-6 primary sources, two secondary and independent sources with 2 significant mentions in relation to band in RSs per Wikipedia:Notability (people). NSINGER: not so sure, your opinions are much welcome. HilssaMansen19Irien1291S • spreading wiki love ~ Message here; no calls 01:19, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
HI @HilssaMansen19, @Bearcat, @Nil NZ,
Thank you all for your valuable feedback and input here. I would really appreciate the chance to make this article better so that it meets Wikipedia criteria, rather than remove it completely and not give it the chance it deserves. @HilssaMansen19 you have pointed out some valid points with regards to Annie Minogue and creating a page for her. Would it be worthwhile? I would be grateful for any help with this article for Annie Minogue Band and Annie Minogue if we are given the chance to go back to a draft - thank you for your assistance with this @HilssaMansen19. Van1985 (talk) 12:18, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per NilZ, awards/competitions if having no WP page may not be considered reliable. Adding to that - unless presented by national academies under sovereign governments, WP may not be there but if RS can confirm it, it would be helpful.
Apart from that as the LA Music Awards(RS), a major award competition with WP page and ASCAP Award (RS mentioned above), hopefully will be considered towards NMUSIC notability. About Annie Minogue article, let's discuss that on my or your talk page per consensus here.
Since, we don't have an appropriate article to redirect to, we can draftify and redirect when an article is there. HilssaMansen19Irien1291S • spreading wiki love ~ Message here; no calls 14:11, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul S. Victor

edit
Paul S. Victor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NMUSIC and unreferenced. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 21:58, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Band Aid (band)

edit
AfDs for this article:
Band Aid (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOPAGE. Band Aid is the collective name of the numerous permutations of musicians who have recorded and released different versions of the charity song Do They Know It's Christmas?. Band Aid has never released any other song.

I previously nominated the Band Aid article for deletion in November 2024. The result was "Handle editorially‎", as, after discussion some editors (including me, at the time) felt the better option might be to merge instead of delete. However, no further discussion happened.

After having now extensively reviewed both articles, I'm now once again proposing we delete Band Aid and redirect to Do They Know It’s Christmas?. Why? There is simply nothing to merge from the Band Aid article. Any information worth keeping is already in the other article. The rest is uncited.

Trimming down both pages to focus on the song and the band would not be an improvement, because all the information relevant to Band Aid is also entirely relevant to Do They Know It’s Christmas?. I’m talking 100% overlap here. The story of Band Aid — the background, recording, the sales, the criticism — is the story of Do They Know It's Christmas. All we're achieving by having two pages is to have the same thing explained twice, at length, in different ways. Popcornfud (talk) 16:25, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Hector Roland

edit
Alfred Hector Roland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of notability. Go D. Usopp (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and France. Go D. Usopp (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:18, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep can be expanded from the French article. See the short bio here[4]. There's a 300+ page biography from 1901 in French.[5] And the French Wikipedia has several more sources:
    • Paul Cardeilhac, Les Montagnards et l'Aventure ; La belle histoire des Quarante Chanteurs Montagnards d'Alfred Roland, Bagnères, Ed. pyrénéennes, 1949. In-12, br, 62p. Avec 6 photographies h.t.
    • Les chanteurs montagnards d'Alfred Roland, Halte-là les montagnards sont là !, 2002, ISBN 2-84618-069-5
    • Pierre Debofle, Un continuateur lozérien d'Alfred Roland : Henri Planchon (1834-1885), ténor des chanteurs montagnards béarnais, d'après sa correspondance, Bulletin de la Société Ramond, 1981, p. 119-133.
--Jahaza (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mallett Brothers Band

edit
Mallett Brothers Band (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No notabilíty demonstrated. JohnMizuki (talk) 23:10, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cranium (band)

edit
Cranium (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seemingly unnotable, with all the sources that I've found only being user-generated. Looking at the other-language Wikipedias only revealed them using blogs and fansites as sources. Nighfidelity (talk) 21:28, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Avraal Sahir

edit
Avraal Sahir (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Connected sources/press releases which are full of puffery, failing to demonstrate independent notability of the subject. No source for the babisas award and I am not sure whether winning this award makes the subject notable for Wikipedia or not. The AfC had been declined twice before the writer moved the page to mainspace themselves. Rht bd (talk) 11:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Megan Kashat

edit
AfDs for this article:
Megan Kashat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV from independent, reliable sources. I tried searching some time back and got little except for the subject's personal pages, and the Reliable Source Search Engine for WikiProject Albums yields only a song/album listing [15]. Very few sources have been added since the first AfD, so more information on the sourcing can be found there. Article was also made by now-blocked editor who was banned as an advertising-only account. I am not confident this article can be redirected anywhere else, so I'm going ahead with the AfD listing. Surayeproject3 (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sidhant Kapoor

edit
AfDs for this article:
Sidhant Kapoor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article appears to be based mainly on family background and routine coverage There is lack of independent, in-depth sourcing. At present there isn’t enough significant coverage to meet GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mona Lisa (singer)

edit
Mona Lisa (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a singer, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. As always, musicians are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage documenting passage of certain specific criteria of achievement -- but as written, the strongest notability claim here is that one of her songs appeared in a movie soundtrack (i.e. the one criterion in NMUSIC that explicitly undermines itself with a "not enough if it's the only criterion they pass" clause), with the rest of the content being strictly on the level of "musician whose music exists".
And the article is referenced entirely to bad primary sourcing that isn't support for notability (label PR, YouTube, Amazon, a music video database), with not a single GNG-building source shown at all, and has been flagged for needing improved references since 2012 without ever having a single new reference added in the entire 13 years since.
I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to American music media from the 1990s can find evidence that she passes GNG on better sourcing than I've been able to locate, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 14:17, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article updated, Bearcat? duffbeerforme (talk) 13:52, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ace File

edit
Ace File (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC WP:BAND LvivLark (talk) 12:04, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

4cf (singer)

edit
4cf (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not passed in WP:BANDMEMBER and WP:SINGER. There is no significant coverage about him. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Pinset

edit
Chris Pinset (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable musician/producer. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Lots of namedropping but notability is not inherited from anyone he worked with. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:46, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Social media use by Azealia Banks

edit
Social media use by Azealia Banks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:ROUTINE coverage of a famous individual's social media accounts does not mean "Social media use by Azealia Banks" is a notable topic. Suggest mergeing back into Azealia Banks#Disputes and controversies, as this does not meet any criteria in WP:NWEB. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:16, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'll refrain from officially saying "keep" since I am the primary contributor to the article. Moreover, I think that trimming is necessary to focus on solely the most notable aspects of this topic. Banks' notability does not give this topic inherited notability per WP:INHERITWEB because of her celebrity status, if there was an article for Social media use by Taylor Swift or a similar celebrity, I would agree that it should be deleted. However, Banks is equally an internet personality as much as she is a musician, and if her article were to cover both her music and internet presence in-depth, the article would be far too long. We can see that Banks' social media activity this in the eyes of the public, as evidenced by the routine spikes in pageviews for both Banks' page and this page whenever a controversy surrounding her arrises. We also see this in the eyes of the media, given its obviously extensive coverage visible in the ref list. I would also push back against the usage of WP:ROUTINE here. Many of Banks' inflammatory statements (for example, calling Thailand "a septic tank of a country") do not make the news or only receive minimal coverage. Media coverage of a specific Banks-related controversy doesn't necessarily fall under WP:ROUTINE, but instead proves Banks' activity is a notable cultural phenomenon. Per WP:WEBCRIT itself, a variety of independent, third-party, reliable sources across different mediums confirm that her behavior is notable as well. That's my rationale on keeping it, however I think it would also be best to loop in WikiProject Internet culture too to see their opinions. 1dagsvlieg (talk) 00:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I think there's probably a notable topic based at least on Banks' feuds with other celebrities. There are multiple RS that have published articles on her feuds collectively as a distinct topic: e.g. Complex, Billboard, The Independent. I could see the case for either keeping or merging this article, so I'm holding off on giving an actual !vote for now, but I think the sources indicate that there's more to this topic than just an arbitrary list of routine incidents. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 13:43, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I definitely agree that the topic covered is notable, though perhaps the way it was framed may not have been the most ideal. As the creator of the article, I would actually say to move the article to something along the lines of Feuds involving Azealia Banks or Incidents involving Azealia Banks, as her feuds, shile notable, aren't necessarily confined to the internet, a notable example being her feud with Russel Crowe. 1dagsvlieg (talk) 23:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge back - her social media use has been controversial (for example, posting about Lil Nas X), but better to place this in context. Bearian (talk) 15:23, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (undecided) - I agree with the Comment from ModernDayTrilobite above. Azealia Banks is known for her social media beefs, perhaps more so than for her music as many of her targets have retorted. Her social media practices and feuds have received reliable coverage as a phenomenon in their own right by several reliable media publications, far outside of her music. I am leaning toward merging this material back to her main article, but there is so much of it that the main article would become lopsided. On the other hand, if this social media-specific article is kept we don't need a list that drones on and on about every single one of her beefs. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:25, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Ridiculousness is not a disqualifier of a page's inclusion into Wikipedia. Wikipedia constantly includes pages that are just as or even more ridiculous than this page. For example, Wikipedia feuds/controversies have their own pages, even though they're a. nowhere near as culturally relevant as Azealia Banks and b. nowhere near as popular as Azealia Banks. I think someone might've mentioned this but forgive me because I'm skimming, Azealia Banks' Wikipedia page views spike once she's said and done something controversial. This demonstrates a clear demand for information and Banks' relevancy in pop culture today. It's easy to dismiss pop culture and its happenings as not relevant and not necessary to document, but it's also important to understand that people are actively looking for sources on these conflicts and happenings, and there's no reason at all to remove this page. If there is, then you're going to have cull many, many pages on Wikipedia which is a. a waste of time b. unnecessary and c. just a detriment to the human base of knowledge and our sense of fun and whimsy. Of course, decorum is important, but don't be mutilating peoples' sense of cultural awareness just because it appears "silly". This attitude gets reflected in things like sports, music, etc. but we look now into past encylcopedias to understand what pop culture and its controversies looked like back then. Who's saying in 30 years, our children won't wonder what Azealia Banks did to get such a controversial name? Smallmandarin (talk) 01:50, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Addressing the last sentence: WP:CRYSTALBALL, we have to judge in the present jolielover♥talk 05:55, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lemis

edit
Lemis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable due to lack of significant independent sources. Rht bd (talk) 20:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

State of Bengal

edit
State of Bengal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

no significant coverage in independent reliable source. Rht bd (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the artist seems to be notable enough in accordance with Wikipedia:Notability. Worldbruce's comment on the artist being in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography is also a strong argument. MelikaShokoufandeh (talk) 07:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deeder Zaman

edit
Deeder Zaman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

no significant coverage in independent reliable source. Sources used are closely associated and some are trivial mentions. Rht bd (talk) 20:53, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lucy Rahman

edit
Lucy Rahman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage in independent reliable source. Rht bd (talk) 20:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shannon Hurley

edit
AfDs for this article:
Shannon Hurley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(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. The references that are presently in the article don't help establish notability. The 2009 discussion resulted in the article's deletion. toweli (talk) 17:34, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Comment: If the decision was to delete in 2009, why wasn't it deleted? -- Jaireeodell (talk) 23:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was indeed deleted in 2009; the current article was created in 2010. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:28, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Doesn't appear to pass notability requirements. I also have concerns about the promotional tone of the article; it looks like the user who made the current article from December 2010 only ever created and edited this page, and hasn't contributed to Wikipedia since December 2010. This alongside the extremely promotional tone and lack of reliable sources in the article means it seems quite possible there has been an undisclosed COI (e.g. the first draft contained extensive information but 0 sources which is highly irregular). Greenleader(2) (talk) 19:34, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    To clarify, this means it has significant issues regarding WP:NOTPROMO, WP:NPOV, and WP:SPAM, as well as failing on the aforementioned WP:GNG issues as raised by the nominator. It is possible at a stretch that a case could be built around one or two requirements in WP:SINGER, but there's no reliable or independent sources that seem to confirm this, so verifiability is not established for this. Greenleader(2) (talk) 19:53, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- so far no SIGCOV in my searches, found this from Google News, though unsure if source is count as RS.Lorraine Crane (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suzana Ansar

edit
Suzana Ansar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No in depth coverage in independent reliable source. Sources used in the article are closely associated with the subject and some are trivial mentions. Rht bd (talk) 12:38, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Srabonti Narmeen Ali

edit
Srabonti Narmeen Ali (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage in reliable independent source. Rht bd (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 16:31, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fairooj Maliha

edit
AfDs for this article:
Fairooj Maliha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant work other than being champion of a reality show. Got coverage for only one event. WP:1E. Rht bd (talk) 15:28, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 16:30, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep WP:1E is about whether a person should be covered in an article about the event for which they are notable or in a stand-alone biography. It is not a rationale for deleting content, but for article titling or merging (either of which I'm open to). To reiterate what I said in the first deletion discussion, this is not a case of WP:BLP1E. That only applies if the person is a low-profile individual, which is often misunderstood. It means a person who received media attention without seeking or desiring it - someone who wanted to be low-profile. She went on the children's reality show hoping for exposure and fame. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:06, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Courtesy ping to still-active participants in earlier AfD discussion, as concerned editors: (Furius—Nearlyevil665) --Worldbruce (talk) 05:17, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rubayyat Jahan

edit
Rubayyat Jahan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreliable promotional sources, probably paid or press releases. No significant independent coverage. Rht bd (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 16:26, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Norberg (engineer)

edit
Bob Norberg (engineer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nominated for deletion 12 years ago and kept on the argument that there is more on this subject to be found. If there is, it has not been, certainly not beyond a passing mention, and he remains in the position of a run-of-the-mill recording engineer who happens to have worked on some big albums. BD2412 T 00:49, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:46, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yangwei Linghua

edit
Yangwei Linghua (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article doesn's have enough significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources which is needed to show notability under WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. 🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 21:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, nearly all coverage of the subject is in Chinese. She's the lead singer for Phoenix Legend, which is a very popular musical duo in China and has been for over twenty years now. You can read an interview here that talks about them and their career, and there's a few articles on Sina that talks about them as well. As for Linghua herself, searching her name in Chinese pulls up hundreds of articles
I will also try to do some work on the article when I get the chance. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 22:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adding on to this, Linghua was a main competitor on Riding the Wind 2025 [zh] (the sixth season of a popular music competition show on Mango TV) And while not the most reliable source, Baidu Baike has a nice list of every single released by Linghua as a solo artist, which you can find sources for their existance elsewhere. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 03:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:

    People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

    • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.

    Sources

    1. The sources found by Microplastic Consumer (talk · contribs). Thank you!
    2. Fan, Wenting 范文婷 (2015-11-14). "玲花新歌太洗脑！1岁女儿都会唱了" [Linghua's new song is so catchy! Even her 1-year-old daughter can sing it] (in Chinese). Phoenix Television. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.

      The article notes: "凤凰传奇组合的杨魏玲花和曾毅，两人“分道扬镳”各寻搭档，并同时出了新歌。尤其，玲花的新歌《出去玩》由张惠妹的御用创作人阿怪监制，与歌手曹格、新秀SNH48李艺彤合作，歌曲十分洗脑，玲花称连她一岁四个月的女儿都会唱了！ ... 没了曾毅的伴唱，玲花选择强强联合，与创作型歌手曹格结成新搭档，并与新秀SNH48李艺彤一起。在侗寨采风过程中，收获快乐和笑声，甚至产生再来旅行玩耍的想法，于是创作新歌《出去玩》，该歌旋律明快，歌词简单明了直中人心，"

      From Google Translate: "Phoenix Legend's Yang Wei Linghua and Zeng Yi have parted ways, each pursuing their own partners and releasing new music. Linghua's new song, "Go Out and Play," is especially catchy, produced by A-Mei's regular songwriter, Aguai, and features singer Gary Chaw and rising star Li Yitong from SNH48. Linghua claims even her one-year-four-month-old daughter can sing it! ... Without Zeng Yi's backing vocals, Linghua chose to join forces, forming a new partnership with singer-songwriter Gary Cao and rising star Li Yitong from SNH48. The field trip to the Dong village brought joy and laughter, and even inspired her to travel and play again. This led to the creation of a new song, "Go Out and Play." The song boasts a bright melody and simple, clear lyrics that hit home."

    3. Li, Hsin-tung 李鋅銅 (2014-06-25). "力挺陸大媽 鳳凰傳奇嗆美媒 廣場舞被批喧鬧 玲花指惹火大媽後果嚴重" [Standing up for Chinese 'dama': Phoenix Legend fires back at U.S. media. Square dancing criticized as noisy, Linghua warns that angering the 'dama' has serious consequences]. China Times (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.

      The article notes: "「鳳凰傳奇」主唱玲花覺得自己是「躺著也中槍」，超級不爽，於是在22日發布的微博中調侃《華爾街日報》，並力挺中國大媽。... 她還追溯八國聯軍的歷史，說美國大兵曾經在中國北京搶東西，到現在東西還沒還呢，這不僅僅是擾民行為， ... 「鳳凰傳奇」是大陸知名的男女二人音樂組合，成員包括女聲主唱楊魏玲花和男聲和聲、說唱曾毅。被認為是2005年後大陸較具影響力的歌手組合之一，出道以來共發行5張原創專輯。"

      From Google Translate: "Phoenix Legend lead singer Ling Hua felt incredibly upset, feeling like she was being "shot in the face even when lying down." She mocked the Wall Street Journal in a Weibo post on the 22nd and offered her support for the Chinese dama. ... She also traced the history of the Eight-Nation Alliance, saying that American soldiers once looted items in Beijing, China, and still haven't returned them. This isn't just a nuisance. ... Phoenix Legend is a well-known mainland Chinese duo, consisting of lead vocalist Yang Wei Linghua and backing vocalist and rapper Zeng Yi. Considered one of the most influential singing groups in mainland China since 2005, they have released five original albums since their debut."

    4. Peng, Lizhao 彭立昭 (2012-04-29). "杨魏玲花"凤凰传奇"的爱情传奇" [The Romantic Story of Yangwei Linghua from Phoenix Legend]. People [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.

      The article notes: "杨魏玲花是著名歌唱组合“凤凰传奇”的主唱，来自大草原的她声音高亢激昂，穿透力极强，在内地歌坛掀起了一轮又一轮的狂潮。玲花的丈夫徐明朝是音乐主编、著名乐评家和词曲作家，两人从相识的第一天起，就结下了不解之缘，2011年3月，他们携手走入婚姻殿堂。他们的爱情就像玲花在歌里唱的那样：... 就在玲花对进军春晚充满了希望时，一件意想不到的事情发生了：有人爆料《月亮之上》涉嫌抄袭英国歌曲《All Rise》……玲花觉得很委屈，她知道这是一首明明白白的原创歌曲，怎么就成了抄袭作品呢？为了弄清楚事情真相，春晚专家组对《月亮之上》与《AllRise》进行了全方位的鉴定，最终认为并不构成抄袭。"

      From Google Translate: "Yang Wei Linghua is the lead singer of the renowned singing group "Phoenix Legend." Hailing from the prairie, her voice is soaring, passionate, and penetrating, creating waves of sensations on the mainland music scene. Linghua's husband, Xu Mingchao, is a music editor, renowned critic, and songwriter. From the first day they met, they bonded, marrying in March 2011. Their love is just like what Linghua sings about in her song: ... Just when Linghua was full of hope for a spot on the Spring Festival Gala, something unexpected happened: someone reported that "Above the Moon" was suspected of plagiarizing the British song "All Rise." Linghua felt deeply wronged. She knew it was a clearly original song, so how could it be considered a copy? To clarify the matter, the Spring Festival Gala expert panel conducted a comprehensive evaluation of both "Above the Moon" and "All Rise" and ultimately determined that they did not constitute plagiarism."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Yangwei Linghua (simplified Chinese: 杨魏玲花; traditional Chinese: 楊魏玲花; pinyin: Yángwèi Línghuā; Mongolian: Үүлэнхуар Üülenkhuar) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 11:25, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided here between editors advocating Keeping it and those arguing for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TX2

edit
TX2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested draft. This article does not demonstrate this band meets the criteria of WP:NBAND with no charting songs and the 3 sources being 1 primary sources, 1 PR source and 1 non functional sources. Other sources found have been from colleg papers or other SEO type listings. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 13:52, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hate to be an avid user of whataboutism/otherstuffexists, but they don't NEED to have charted songs to have a page. there are plenty of other criteria that can allow an artist page to exist. especially considering the amount of other artist pages who's subjects have never had charting songs. Haaayzey (talk) 18:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Haaayzey, so which criteria do you think they meet? I didn't say they had to have a charted song, only it's a quick avenue to determine notability. I then evaluated the sources in the article at the time and the ones I could find in my WP:BEFORE search. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 19:57, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Has had several EPs/works published through a major record label, currently one of the most popular/notable pop-punk bands of Colorado, has been placed in rotation of a major radio station (Octane (Sirius XM)). Haaayzey (talk) 12:38, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 14:16, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Giampaolo Pasquile

edit
AfDs for this article:
Giampaolo Pasquile (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

None of the sources are significant coverage in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. This person thus fails WP:NBIO. Both of the "delete" arguments from the previous AfD were made by blocked sockpuppets. GTrang (talk) 20:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keri Rene Fuller

edit
Keri Rene Fuller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article fails to establish notability per WP:NACTOR. While the subject has appeared in Broadway productions, the sources provided consist primarily of routine casting announcements, fan wiki entries, and basic promotional coverage rather than the "significant coverage in reliable sources" required by WP:BIO. The references include fan wikis (Six the Musical Wiki, Cats Musical Wiki), casting announcements, and brief mentions, but lack substantial independent coverage demonstrating why this performer merits encyclopedic inclusion. No evidence of major awards, significant critical recognition, or other achievements that would clearly establish notability beyond routine professional work. The viral social media moments mentioned do not constitute the type of lasting, encyclopedic significance required for inclusion. Keironoshea (talk) 13:16, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thilsebatti (talk) 13:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Lights Drum and Bugle Corps

edit
Northern Lights Drum and Bugle Corps (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet the criteria for notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 
Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per relevant Wikipedia guidelines. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus. — Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:49, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I am requesting the restoration of the article Northern Lights Drum and Bugle Corps, which was nominated for deletion with the rationale “does not meet the criteria for notability.” I believe this conclusion was made without considering the breadth of significant, independent coverage available for the corps. The group meets Wikipedia’s General Notability Guideline and the organizational notability guideline (WP:ORG) through multiple reliable, independent sources.
Examples include:
  • Drum Corps International (DCI) – Official profile and results pages confirm the corps’ acceptance into DCI’s All-Age Class (2025) and participation in multiple DCI SoundSport competitions (2023–2024).
  • WGVU PBS – Feature segment covering the corps’ history, performances, and role in the Muskegon community.
  • NPR Affiliate Coverage – Radio broadcast discussing the corps’ mission and activities, providing more than routine coverage.
  • FloMarching – Independent reporting on the corps’ competitive seasons, show themes, and placement results.
  • Drum-corps.net – Archived competitive scores, demonstrating national-level participation and ranking.
These sources go beyond passing mentions and provide substantial detail on the corps’ operations, competitive results, and growth. For example, documented membership growth from ~42 members in 2023 to ~97 members in 2024, the addition of a color guard section, and back-to-back SoundSport Gold ratings show sustained activity and impact. The corps has placed in national competitions, earning high scores in its division and performing at DCI-sanctioned events across multiple states.
I am prepared to restore the article with strict adherence to verifiability and neutrality, ensuring that every statement is supported by one of these independent sources. Given the demonstrated coverage and the corps’ active participation at a national competitive level, I respectfully request undeletion so the article can be rebuilt with properly sourced, encyclopedic content.
}} Brasilianman (talk) 01:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So, we have editors arguing for Deletion, Draftification and an unbolded Keep. Right now, no consensus. A source review would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:42, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 06:11, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Octoroc

edit
AfDs for this article:
Doctor Octoroc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of GNG. Couldn't find more sources that aren't the subject's videos masquerading as sources or marginally related to the subject. Go D. Usopp (talk) 18:07, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:23, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I've checked the sources listed above as supposedly meeting the WP:GNG standard of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent." These sources listed above are "Kotaku, 1UP.com, Offworld, GameSetWatch, Variety." I did not find "Variety" in the article and a google search for "Octoroc" on variety.com found absolutely nothing as did a search on Variety's website itself. All of the other suggested sources are either extremely short insignificant coverage, or an interview that is not independent of the subject. Source assessment table is below. Fails WP:GNG completely. Asparagusstar (talk) 14:37, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source assessment table prepared by User:Asparagusstar
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
      Just six short sentences ✘ No
      Just four short sentences and a track listing ✘ No
      Just five short sentences ✘ No
      Just three sentences ✘ No
  An interview of the subject is not independent of the subject     ✘ No
      Just two sentences ✘ No
      Just five sentences ✘ No
      Just three sentences ✘ 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}}.
  • Comment Apologies I'm not sure where I got Variety from in my previous comment. Thank you for doing the source analysis above, its useful. However, I do disagree with your interpretation of WP:SIGCOV, which does not focus on the length of sources. Rather, you should be assessing whether the sources have details relating to the artist, and that the mentions are non-trivial. Whilst they are short, the Kotaku and Gamesetwatch articles both contain details relating directly to the subject, and are non-trivial in nature. If we take all the Kotaku coverage as a whole, it would easily meet sigcov; ditto with gamesetwatch. Both meet RS per WP:VG/RS.
Would be good to have a source analysis of all the article's sources, as it includes some listed at WP:RSPSOURCES like Wired.
Separately to the above, adding some further sources to this discussion I've been able to find:
Nil🥝 02:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This editor has already wasted enough of our time with ridiculous claims about nonexistent coverage in Variety and how a two sentence blog post provides the Wikipedia standard of significant coverage to write an encyclopedia article about a living person. There is no need to waste further time reiterating these sorts of ridiculous ideas. Asparagusstar (talk) 14:11, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I made a genuine mistake which I already apologised for; that shouldn't be grounds for dropping AGF.
Had you done a full source analysis of the article's references, you may have realised I probably got Variety and Vulture mixed up. Yes, that's on me.
But I'm not here to waste anyone's time, and I'm not against the article being deleted – I just want to ensure that any such decision is done so robustly. Nil🥝 22:28, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I created a table analyzing every source this editor wasted our time with by falsely claiming met WP:GNG, including time I spent searching for a source they claimed was in Variety which there is no evidence even exists. I have no idea why I am still getting responses from them. There is no need for them to waste further time reiterating these sorts of ridiculous ideas. Asparagusstar (talk) 22:52, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You've made your point, now you're just being WP:UNCIVIL. Yes, I made a mistake, and I apologise for it.
If that's ridiculous to you, you're welcome to walk away. Nil🥝 23:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea why I am still getting responses from them. There is no need for them to waste further time reiterating these sorts of ridiculous ideas. Asparagusstar (talk) 23:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Turns out, there is an article on Variety if you search under his real name... Just not enough to count as sigcov, however. Nil🥝 06:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will note that the table above does not evaluate the reliable column. But the sourcing here is at maximum relevant to write about a music album, not a biography. Also the last two sources are local coverage. IgelRM (talk) 17:03, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:AUD doesn't exclude them as counting if At least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is used. Whether they pass WP:NWORK may be more of an issue... Nil🥝 06:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I did a source analysis of every reference currently in the article here, and it's... not great. The best source towards meeting GNG is the profile I introduced above. In addition to what's in the article, I found the following which appears to meet sigcov:
The biggest issue here is when we apply WP:NWORK to the existing sigcov. Ideally, there'd be one more source in order to comfortably pass GNG. Nil🥝 06:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciate the effort searching for sources. But the Spiegel article is filed under Angeklickt and the last paragraphs are purely showcasing videos. Whether the author of My Spilt Milk is a journalist or not, it is still a blog. I don't think both can meet GNG. IgelRM (talk) 18:03, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My Spilt Milk should fit the definition of subject-matter expert under WP:BLOGS, as Rawls is an established music journalist and academic. Rawls aside, I totally accept that overall GNG is pretty weak / difficult to establish here though. Nil🥝 21:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:41, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete for non-notability. The above comments of ZXCVBNM match my views which, as Nil mentions, I have tried to capture in WP:NOTWORK, although this is not formal policy. The article does some helpful and unhelpful things: it provides a lot of reliable secondary coverage about the works of the artist quite amply, but tends to over-source and lean on trivial coverage. Examples of this are using the one sentence in the Clair book about the subject - Chiptune artist Doctor Octoroc raised more than $10,000 on Kickstarter to [create a tribute album] made "using only the five monophonic channels available on the NES RP2A03 sound chip." and then extrapolates what is obviously a quote from the Kickstarter to generalise about the artist's equipment and setup. The only significant coverage about the artist I can see is the Spiegel article and the Alex Rawls blog - accepting that Rawls is an able subject matter expert and this source is valuable. It's almost there. But it isn't enough to reliably furnish a WP:BLP for an article about the subject rather than about the works the subject has created, given the higher standard for BLP articles. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:04, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

edit

Categories

edit

Proposed deletions

edit

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

References

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Bands_and_musicians&oldid=1307954655"