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.
Procedural Keep - No evidence that
WP:BEFORE was followed and good evidence that it probably wasn't as this was part of a mass-nomination of dozens of articles about Greek culture over the course of a hour.
FOARP (
talk)
15:59, 11 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - The sourcing in the article is horrible. Metal Archives, Facebook and some shop site? Oh my god! But anyways, I looked this fellow up and I did not found much reliable sources. The usual crap like Discogs, Metal Archives, Spotify, Bandcamp, Rate Your Music and the like is here, and shops where you can buy merch, and blogs, but I found nothing that indicates notability. Even though I found some interviews and album reviews, those sites look like blogs. So I think Zemial is not notable. But I don't vote yet as there might be some reliable sources I am unaware of. I did not find any in Google. Update: I found
this album review in
Rock Hard (magazine), a notable German metal/rock magazine. But one source is not enough
GhostDestroyer100 (
talk)
17:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. I spent a lot of time tidying this up in February 2019 (and again in March this year). At the time, I wondered just what made this notable and tagged it as questionable, in the expectation that someone would improve the sources or supply evidence of notability. Nothing since convinces me it is notable.
Emeraude (
talk)
17:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment How about addressing the issue that the only part of the entire article that is referenced (reliably or not) is the first sentence? In other words, we have a source that the subject exists, but that's all!
Emeraude (
talk)
16:46, 25 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete Sources which prove that something exists, but has not achieved anything, do not validate the existence of an article. If, say, a political party had an article with inadequate sources, it would be deleted, and this underlines the problem of only sourcing an organisation for what they are expected to do, rather than adding what they have achieved.
doktorbwordsdeeds22:52, 25 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Week Keep Althouth there isn't much about him, it looks like he has gained some recognition - notablility as project/mysician Zemial/Archon Vorskaath in the German speaking world
[1], but also elsewhere
[2]. True, the article is perhaps mainly a product of connected contributors as its history record indicates, and needs editing and addition of proper sources to verify its content. ǁǁǁ ǁ
Chalk19 (
talk)
08:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - Note how Glucken123 did not answer to the question whether there is evidence about "there is nothing reliable about Metal.de" or is it just his opinion. That is always a suspicious sign. I think that's just his opinion and Metal.de is indeed a reliable source.
GhostDestroyer100 (
talk)
17:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete Just looking at the article at face value I see nothing of notable accomplishment. No major labels, gold disks, or industry awards. In general if one is having trouble finding independent coverage for a bio then that person also fails GNG. BlueRiband►21:20, 9 July 2020 (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.
Procedural Keep - No evidence that
WP:BEFORE was followed and good evidence that it probably wasn't as this was part of a mass-nomination of dozens of articles about Greek culture over the course of a hour.
FOARP (
talk)
15:59, 11 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - The sourcing in the article is horrible. Metal Archives, Facebook and some shop site? Oh my god! But anyways, I looked this fellow up and I did not found much reliable sources. The usual crap like Discogs, Metal Archives, Spotify, Bandcamp, Rate Your Music and the like is here, and shops where you can buy merch, and blogs, but I found nothing that indicates notability. Even though I found some interviews and album reviews, those sites look like blogs. So I think Zemial is not notable. But I don't vote yet as there might be some reliable sources I am unaware of. I did not find any in Google. Update: I found
this album review in
Rock Hard (magazine), a notable German metal/rock magazine. But one source is not enough
GhostDestroyer100 (
talk)
17:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. I spent a lot of time tidying this up in February 2019 (and again in March this year). At the time, I wondered just what made this notable and tagged it as questionable, in the expectation that someone would improve the sources or supply evidence of notability. Nothing since convinces me it is notable.
Emeraude (
talk)
17:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment How about addressing the issue that the only part of the entire article that is referenced (reliably or not) is the first sentence? In other words, we have a source that the subject exists, but that's all!
Emeraude (
talk)
16:46, 25 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete Sources which prove that something exists, but has not achieved anything, do not validate the existence of an article. If, say, a political party had an article with inadequate sources, it would be deleted, and this underlines the problem of only sourcing an organisation for what they are expected to do, rather than adding what they have achieved.
doktorbwordsdeeds22:52, 25 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Week Keep Althouth there isn't much about him, it looks like he has gained some recognition - notablility as project/mysician Zemial/Archon Vorskaath in the German speaking world
[1], but also elsewhere
[2]. True, the article is perhaps mainly a product of connected contributors as its history record indicates, and needs editing and addition of proper sources to verify its content. ǁǁǁ ǁ
Chalk19 (
talk)
08:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - Note how Glucken123 did not answer to the question whether there is evidence about "there is nothing reliable about Metal.de" or is it just his opinion. That is always a suspicious sign. I think that's just his opinion and Metal.de is indeed a reliable source.
GhostDestroyer100 (
talk)
17:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete Just looking at the article at face value I see nothing of notable accomplishment. No major labels, gold disks, or industry awards. In general if one is having trouble finding independent coverage for a bio then that person also fails GNG. BlueRiband►21:20, 9 July 2020 (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.