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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:37, 26 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Jasper Cameron (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

This "songwriter/producer" fails WP:CREATIVE and WP:GNG. Clarityfiend ( talk) 00:36, 11 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 02:41, 11 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 02:41, 11 November 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete WP:NOTINHERITED. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 03:04, 11 November 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete with no prejudice against recreation as a redirect per Beemer69. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) ( talk • contribs) 03:22, 11 November 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete Other than a few unimportant google items, a small write up in Billboard "Urban songwriters to watch" is a start, but it is the only thing and not enough. And considering it is 10 years old, it seems his track towards notability has yet to pan out and instead the subject has became a run-of-the-mill, working, industry journeyman. If he ever does anything that merits significant, independent coverage/recognition, article can be recreated. Also, it appears to be a vanity piece by an SPA editor. ShelbyMarion ( talk) 14:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC) reply
• Delete total failure of the general notability guidelines, let alone the music bio guidelines which are if anything more stringent. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 04:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC) reply
• Keep The article can certainly be better written by a music oriented editor. Perhaps the article does not emphasize this well enough, but he has produced tracks on two Billboard top 30 albums. He co-wrote the lead track on a #2 album by Christina Aguilera I added additional sources and some wikilinks. He is of enough importance that wikipedia also has well populated categories for songs written by Jasper Cameron and albums produced by Jasper Cameron. It would be kind of stupid to delete the master profile associated to those categories just because the above delete votes didn't take the time to google him before casting their votes. Trackinfo ( talk) 08:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Per request to discuss new sources. I previously i-voted “delete” and remain unswayed. Contrary to the statement with the “keep” vote above, when I originally weighed in I indeed searched for corroboration of notability. The additions the editor added were ones I had previously googled and at the time summed them up with my statement “..other than a few unimportant google items..” I stand by my assessment: three (Allmusic, Discogs, and Umusicpub) are merely listings and/or credits. The other two (Verge Campus and the 3/30/17 issue of Billboard) are name checks in articles about other subjects. These confirm existence but fail as examples of significant coverage. It’s true the writer(s) identify this subject as “high profile,” but that doesn’t mean he is “high profile” per wikipedia notability standards. The sole thing with merit, which I acknowledged with my original comment, is an entry in a “people to watch”-type article from a 2006 Billboard. It’s a fine argument for notability, but considering it is the only one (and not exclusively devoted to him as the subject) it is not enough. As for credits/collaborations, etc. with notable recordings, I defer to WP:INHERENT. Even if notability conferred was a qualifying criteria, it’s worth noting that his credits for tracks on notable albums/singles (such as a track on a Christine Aguilera album, where he is one of 6 co-writers on the song in question) lists him among many other contributing producers. In such cases, it is the Executive Producer who is more the significant creative contributor. I’m not seeing that he has had that level of involvement on these significant works. All combined, I still believe I hit the nail on the head with my original assessment: “a working, industry journeyman,” and a keep vote for this subject is to grant a wikipedia page for existence rather than notability. And yes, “existence” can mean respected and accomplished in one’s field. But per WP, that doesn’t automatically convert to encyclopedic importance. ShelbyMarion ( talk) 22:08, 20 November 2017 (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.