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.
Comment undecided for now. Two sources fulfill GNG requirements:
[1],
[2]. Many other sources like Atwood are non-professional and probably unreliable. However, nom's reasoning is flawed:
WP:BLP states that deletion of largely unsourced articles is only the last resort, but there is no indication of this. –
UnnamedUser (
talk;
contribs)
01:11, 21 December 2019 (UTC) (this user was indefinitely blocked on 18 January 2020)reply
Keep The subject meets
WP:MUSICBIO#5 "Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels", with two albums on
Audiotree, as clearly stated in the article. The state of sourcing in an article is not a reason for deletion, per
WP:NPOSSIBLE. As for sources, as well as the Chicago Tribune profile found by
UnnamedUser[3], there are reviews in Substream Magazine[4], Third Coast Review[5], Hooligan Magazine[6], PopMatters[7], Audiofemme[8], and a couple of paras at the beginning of an interview in Vents Magazine[9]. They don't all have Wikipedia articles, but some of them do seem to have editorial overview.
RebeccaGreen (
talk)
09:49, 24 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep as per the significant coverage in multiple reliable sources identified above such as Chicago Tribune, PopMatters, Chicago Reader and others that show that
WP:GNG is passed and deletion is not necessary in this case, imv
Atlantic306 (
talk)
01:56, 30 December 2019 (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.
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.
Comment undecided for now. Two sources fulfill GNG requirements:
[1],
[2]. Many other sources like Atwood are non-professional and probably unreliable. However, nom's reasoning is flawed:
WP:BLP states that deletion of largely unsourced articles is only the last resort, but there is no indication of this. –
UnnamedUser (
talk;
contribs)
01:11, 21 December 2019 (UTC) (this user was indefinitely blocked on 18 January 2020)reply
Keep The subject meets
WP:MUSICBIO#5 "Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels", with two albums on
Audiotree, as clearly stated in the article. The state of sourcing in an article is not a reason for deletion, per
WP:NPOSSIBLE. As for sources, as well as the Chicago Tribune profile found by
UnnamedUser[3], there are reviews in Substream Magazine[4], Third Coast Review[5], Hooligan Magazine[6], PopMatters[7], Audiofemme[8], and a couple of paras at the beginning of an interview in Vents Magazine[9]. They don't all have Wikipedia articles, but some of them do seem to have editorial overview.
RebeccaGreen (
talk)
09:49, 24 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep as per the significant coverage in multiple reliable sources identified above such as Chicago Tribune, PopMatters, Chicago Reader and others that show that
WP:GNG is passed and deletion is not necessary in this case, imv
Atlantic306 (
talk)
01:56, 30 December 2019 (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.