- 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 keep. But new sources need to be integrated. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 09:28, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sol Seppy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP of a musician, not reliably sourced as being any more notable per WP:NMUSIC than she was when it was tried a few years ago at her real name and deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sophie Michalitsianos. The only reference being cited here at all is her primary source "our artists" profile on the self-published website of her own record label, with no evidence of reliable or notability-supporting sources being shown at all, and nothing claimed in the article body is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have much better sourcing than this. As always, the notability test for a musician is not just that her self-created web presence metaverifies itself: it requires music journalists to pay attention to her in newspapers or magazines, but no sources like that have been shown at all. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- delete as the nom's argument is sound and sufficient. Graywalls ( talk) 06:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Even a cursory Google search finds sufficient coverage for a pass of WP:GNG: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. -- Michig ( talk) 05:44, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:16, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
- weak Keep - seems to barely pass GNG, but those sources need to be incorporated in the article. Hydromania ( talk) 06:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- 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.
The result was keep. But new sources need to be integrated. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 09:28, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sol Seppy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP of a musician, not reliably sourced as being any more notable per WP:NMUSIC than she was when it was tried a few years ago at her real name and deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sophie Michalitsianos. The only reference being cited here at all is her primary source "our artists" profile on the self-published website of her own record label, with no evidence of reliable or notability-supporting sources being shown at all, and nothing claimed in the article body is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have much better sourcing than this. As always, the notability test for a musician is not just that her self-created web presence metaverifies itself: it requires music journalists to pay attention to her in newspapers or magazines, but no sources like that have been shown at all. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Bearcat ( talk) 19:07, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- delete as the nom's argument is sound and sufficient. Graywalls ( talk) 06:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Even a cursory Google search finds sufficient coverage for a pass of WP:GNG: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. -- Michig ( talk) 05:44, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:16, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
- weak Keep - seems to barely pass GNG, but those sources need to be incorporated in the article. Hydromania ( talk) 06:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- 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.