From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
Note that 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 links to other discussions ( prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bands and musicians.
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

Moxiie

Moxiie (  | 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:MUSIC. All of her songs are self-published and appear to have received very little attention from reliable sources. Search results for her stage name are almost exclusively the songs themselves or her social media, and results for her legal name largely pertain to her career as a makeup artist. Majora4 ( talk) 23:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: The two archived MTV sources (both a small paragraph each) are about all there is. I can't find anything now, 10+ years later. I don't think the singer made any critical waves; no album reviews, no charted singles. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and New York. WCQuidditch 00:13, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Op:l Bastards

Op:l Bastards (  | 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. Non-notable band. SL93 ( talk) 21:28, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Rylo Huncho

Rylo Huncho (  | 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)

Coverage only concerns his suicide. See WP:BLP1E. TolWol ( talk) 04:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Supersci

Supersci (  | 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 by an IP user: Non-notable group, going by available sources. Both with its current ("Supersci") and its former ("Superscientifiku") name, the group is mentioned on some Swedish websites, but with very few exceptions (e.g. Sundsvalls Tidning) either these sources are non-reliable, or the subject is mentioned only in passing. GrabUp - Talk 18:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Gasper Crasto

Gasper Crasto (  | 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 am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG. Apart from a lot of trivial mentions, I found a few promotional pieces about his book ( 1, 2, 3), all of which let us know that the book "is available on Flipkart, and on Amazon for a price of Rs 650 in India, €14.23 in UK, and $14.90 in USA." JTtheOG ( talk) 17:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Najma Akhtar

Najma Akhtar (  | 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 subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC Dowrylauds ( talk) 13:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Salman Muqtadir

Salman Muqtadir (  | 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)

Sources are trivial (included in a list of other youtubers) and non-independent. One significant coverage is about his investigation by the police. No other significant independent secondary source covering his popularity as a content creator. - AlbeitPK ( talk) 01:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Migue García (musician)

Migue García (musician) (  | 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)

Biography of a musician that does not clear WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NMUSIC. While several sources refer to Migue Garcia, they all cover him in a WP:TRIVIAL manner connected to his father Charly Garcia, from whom notability cannot be WP:INHERITED. Other available sources found in BEFORE search are user-generated or primary. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 17:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Mr. SOS

Mr. SOS (  | 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)

Seems to fail WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. Enahnced some, but recreation of previously deleted subject. Mikeblas ( talk) 19:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Terrell Hines

Terrell Hines (  | 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)

Doesn't meet WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:SIGCOV. In the article, sources are greatly lacking, and the ones seems unreliable. Applicable to WP:INTERVIEW. Maybe per WP:ATD, It do be redirected to List of American musicians. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 20:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Rick Burke (musician)

Rick Burke (musician) (  | 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)

(PROD declined with no explanation) Fails WP:MUSICBIO. What little coverage I can find featuring this person's name is about his bands, not Burke himself Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This page we should keep given that the musician written about has a long-term and ongoing authentic discography as cited on reliable archival / data sites such as Discogs with news features on various media outlets. If for some reason it is a problem for the information to be listed under “Rick Burke (musician)”, I would strongly recommend that rather than deleting the article on superfluous grounds, the content should be split into 2 pages: one for “Comacozer” and one for “Tropical Sludge” with a redirect from the original “Rick Burke (musician)” page. In saying that, it does not make sense to split the information into several pages therefore it should be retained as one to keep the information tidy on Wikipedia. NEXUS6N6MAA10816 ( talk) 06:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

San Jose Taiko

San Jose Taiko (  | 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)

While previously deleted for G11, this time the page has been written in a more encyclopedic tone. Unfortunately, there is just not any coverage that I can find. BrigadierG ( talk) 20:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References to published academic work demonstrating the significance of this organization to the art of taiko in North America have been added, as well as national recognition from the NEA for the original managing director and artistic director of the organization. 31N2024 ( talk) 00:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Ecko Miles

Ecko Miles (  | 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 do not see enough evidence to establish WP:NMUSICIAN. Some sources are unreliably having a close connection to the subject, some are WP:ROUTINE coverages announcing founding of Daed Empire, most are PRs, announcing collabo or music release, etc. Fails WP:GNG in a nutshell. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

keep the subject meets some of the criterias of WP:NMUSICIAN for example the song he had with popular Nigerian rapper and musician charted major charts in the country as was cited in the article , also I would say it meets WP:GNG the sources used in the subject article are in line with WP:NGRS too, after thorough investigations I will say this the subject was not as notable as he was before the collaboration he had with Zlatan and odumodu blvck but that collaboration was what increased his notability and brought him further into the limelight. ProWikignome ( talk) 21:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Bongofari

Bongofari (  | 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)

Apart from lacking sources to reliable sources, the article doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 16:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Gemma Khalid

Gemma Khalid (  | 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)

Significance for WP:BIO is not visible.-- Анатолий Росдашин ( talk) 03:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Danila Kashin

Danila Kashin (  | 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)

Per WP:SINGLEEVENT. The remaining sources are news articles. Skepsiz ( talk) 18:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

List of best-selling music artists

List of best-selling music artists (  | 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)

It is not possible for anyone to record how many records of a particular artist have been sold nationally or internationally. Now even if we were to mention only what WP:RSs have said, then this list would be among those articles that fail that requirement the most.

This list is nothing but a WP:LISTCRUFT. This list has been probematic to core. Various RfC have been carried out but there has been no solution for this list. [8] [9]

As noted by the reliable sources, Elvis Presley, The Beatles are widely regarded to have sold more than 1 billion records, [10] [11] while Michael Jackson has sold over 750 million records. [12] However, this page is evidently misrepresenting their figures.

This list does not make mention of Bing Crosby who is known to have sold over 900 million records. [13] Could it be because Crosby does not have enough fans who are eager to impose their POV on this page? That appears to be biggest factor behind the names (at least the top ones) found on this list.

Not just that, but this list does not even list any artists from the most populated countries like India and China where some artists have clearly sold more than 200 million records such as A. R. Rahman, [14] Wei Wei [15] and more.

It would make more sense to have this list deleted instead of wasting any more time on it. Ratnahastin ( talk) 16:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Lists of people. WCQuidditch 17:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Keep: Hundreds of Wikipedia articles mention total sales figures of music artists and bands, so it can be asserted that the existence itself of this List is more than coherent. Apart from that, it contains very valuable information for the reader, such as the total amount of certified sales of each artist/band, with numerical (ergo, objective) data from multiple music certification systems of different countries/markets.
    The claimed sales figures, even if they are estimates, are supported by RS from news organizations (as stipulated in the List's guidelines). It is true that there are sources that claim the figure of 1 billion records for The Beatles [16], Jackson [17] and Presley [18], but there has been a consensus for years not to include such high figures as they were considered inflated.
    In those two RfCs mentioned above, the total deletion of the List was never considered, but rather had the objective of improving it, especially the last one, which modified the methodology previously used in the List, removing its percentage-based fabricated requirements (which were defended by the user Harout72, who incurred in WP:OWNERSHIP and decided to cease his activity on Wikipedia when he saw that the methodology he defended was going to be changed). These changes, results of a voting, make it now possible to include artists like A. R. Rahman or Wei Wei. It is true that perhaps it should have been done earlier, but there is certainly a consensus to do so. Indeed, you can see on the List's Talk page that we have been discussing the inclusion of these artists this week.
    Salvabl ( talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    You are correct
    Apple Corps, the record company that owns the Beatles stated the group had sold 600 million records which predated this article as they were listed at 1 billion at the time.
    "Apple Corps Ltd. was founded by The Beatles in 1968 to look after the group’s own affairs. The London-based company has administered the catalogue of The Beatles releases of the 1960s that have sold to date more than 600 million records, tape sand CDs." [19] [20] [21]
    For Elvis Presley, his record company Universal Music Group states that he has sold 500 million records to date "Widely acclaimed as the best-selling solo music artist of all time, Presley has sold more than 500 million records and holds the distinction for most songs charting on Billboard's Top 40 with 114 hits". [22] [23]
    For Michael Jackson, Sony Music Group stated he had sold 750 million records around the time the Beatles were claimed to have sold 600 million records [24] [25]
    This page as such is largely accurate barring a few outdated references. Never17 ( talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Keep: there's literally no reason to delete this article. We already reached a consensus from various editors to improve the page. Also Elvis Presley is claimed to have sold 500 million records Reuters (2022) - 500 Million , along with The Beatles NME (2024) - 500 Million and Michael Jackson Yahoo (2024) - 500 Million. This article is also far more reliable than the list of best selling authors page and generally one of the most well put together on the website and has been cited by Guinness World Records and various other media outlets
    Never17 ( talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Keep - an article not yet being "good enough" is not alone reason to delete it. Jonathan Deamer ( talk) 22:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Keep - As per above, the article just needs better sourcing and the topic has many reputable sources on it already. Sharrdx ( talk) 02:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Oh yes, the credibility factor is of utmost importance. It is as you stated problematic. If readers dispute the validity of this list in any format, then we have a problem, for we have no credibility. You mentioned Bing Crosby? Since 1926 and beyond, it is believed that yes, as you stated, that he may have reached that astronomical figure of what 900 million? and yet, where is he on the list? Where is Nana Mouskouri? Who sings in multiple languages and most importantly, according to an extensive number of sources she has sold over 350 million albums worldwide, and globally speaking, she is considered the best-selling female artist of all time. She is also nowhere to be found on this list. Moreover, other entertainers who I have mentioned in the past who are nonexistent in this list/article are Rocio Dúrcal, Rocio Jurado, Charles Aznavour, Roberto Carlos among the notables, who are not accorded in unit sales and are erroneously missing. All these artists have sold millions of units internationally. Also, for improvement purposes are some of the record claims, which are also dubious. Most notably, Julio Iglesias who in just about all websites and reputed reliable global sources establish him in the echelons of 300 million records sold globally and not the 150 million claimed by the Wikipedia article. I could go on and on with example after example stating without reservation that yes, we perhaps have a credibility problem. However, we can make adjustments and improve these omissions.
Case in point: there are other entertainers' who are also European descent and should never be omitted from this list or any list, such as the legendary Spanish singers (Raphael and Camilo Sesto), but for reasons unbeknownst to many, there are not. Furthermore, add to this credibility problem the Elvis Presley and Beatles factor; Without question and with respect to those who state that their sales are inflated, they are just too many sources being indicative that these two acts have easily surpassed the billion mark in sales. So, with all these examples that are obviously flawed, do I think that this Wikipedia list/article should be eradicated or faced deletion? No!! No!! No!! we must work to improve it. We have knowledgeable contributors previously mentioned who can make the proper adjustments and corrections to this list/article so it can be the very best it can be, to the perfected core. I for one, believe in the collaborations and countless contributions of these very capable writers/editors and users who I have previously mentioned in the past. In closing, I share the sentiments of these users and contributors who want to keep it. Let us not delete this article for not being good enough but improve on it so it could be more than just good enough. It could be the envy of all other website articles, due to its authenticity and factuality. Let's make it work!! Victor0327 ( talk) 03:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Absolutely a listcruft and is used for POV pushing. I don't see a List of best selling authors. Orientls ( talk) 06:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    List of best-selling fiction authors 170.203.201.93 ( talk) 14:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This page has numerous inflated and questionable inclusions like William Shakespeare selling 4 billion books (how can you even prove that?) Or Agatha Christie selling 2 billion books, completely unreliable.
    Now compare that to this, it's fairly easy to prove most of the numbers provided based on the individual claimed sales figures for each of their releases. Nothing is inflated Never17 ( talk) 16:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep for reasons already said above. Breaktheicees ( talk) 08:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Strong keep. Per all the reasons stated above by multiple users. — Tom (T2ME) 11:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Reliable sources give ample coverage of the bestselling musicians, this something notable they mention. You can use the talk page to discuss any editing that needs to be done if you believe someone should be added or information is outdated. Dream Focus 12:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - seems like all of the objections in the nomination statement can be overcome with editing. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 12:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I don't think there is doubt over the list that it is being used simply for promoting particular fans' POV. The main articles of these artists already have details on how many records they have sold. I don't see why this list is needed. desmay ( talk) 15:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Whether you believe its needed or not is irrelevant. WP:NOTNEEDED. And its not just fans, many people are simply curious, which is why in the past 90 days, it has had 543,364 pageviews. Dream Focus 16:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    The media quite literally uses this page all of the time when mentioning popular music acts, they will always quote Wikipedia's sales figures for the artist in question. It makes no sense to get rid of this page. There are minor issues with it, but it's absolutely useful and generally very well put together Never17 ( talk) 22:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I agree: We need a best-selling list so avid music lovers, musical pundits and historians can use this list/page as a form of reference registry. Moreover, Wikipedia has references on an uncountable number of historical figures and subjects of study, for educational purposes, as an example, the lives of enlightened thinkers "Voltaire" and "Isaac Newton"; It also catapults into the lives of musical revolutionaries such as Elvis, Michael Jackson and The Beatles. This page could be used as a further intellectual study delving into a subject matter which many people are obviously interested in. The editors and contributors will make the right adjustments to make this list a factual coherent and cohesive one. Furthermore, and to alleviate the tensions among some contributors, POV pushing in pursuing an agenda based on fandom to any particular artist will be eradicated. We cannot promote "particular fans" POV as contributor desmay has stated. This shall not be an Elvis, Michael Jackson or Beatle fan page; but a truthful, unbiased, and impartial directory based on fact and intertwined with reputable reliable sources. As previously stated, the hard-working contributors and editor/writers for this best-selling list/article will make it work. Victor0327 ( talk) 02:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Anybody who is saying that this fancruft can be improved with writing is simply not addressing the fact that this article has been impossible to fix because of its use as a fancruft. Wikipedia is not for that purpose. Georgethedragonslayer ( talk) 04:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Most are in favor of keeping this article, we've had past attempts at trying to delete the article from fans who were upset about it and it's always been overruled. Never17 ( talk) 17:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: As per reasons stated above. Mazewaxie ( talkcontribs) 14:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Zaira Meneses

Zaira Meneses (  | 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 does not meet the notability guidelines outlined in WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It was accepted through AfC by an inexperienced user. The reference to The New York Times is merely a passing mention and is behind a paywall. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, and Mexico. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - I have added in citations and removed statements where I could not find reliable sources. I think the best coverage of her work is here. [1] [2] [3] As noted above, the New York Times article also includes a few sentences on her performance in New York; I think that this is an acceptable citation even if it is behind a paywall or available at ProQuest. DaffodilOcean ( talk) 11:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    My mention of the paywall was merely for informational purposes and not to express any opposition to the source. Whether behind a paywall or freely accessible, a good reference is always valuable. Hitro talk 11:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References

  1. ^ Shaw, Punch (2008-05-24). "Guitarists' concert is well worth the wait". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. pp. A16. Retrieved 2024-05-17.
  2. ^ Siegel, Steve (2013-10-06). "Music is family affair for guitarist Eliot Fisk". The Morning Call. pp.  [1], [2]. Retrieved 2024-05-17.
  3. ^ Small, Mark (2021). "An Afro-Cuban Legacy". Acoustic Guitar ; San Anselmo. No. 331. pp. 30–33 – via Proquest.

Brian Plummer (musician)

Brian Plummer (musician) (  | 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 musician, not reliably sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. The only properly verifiable claim of notability here is that he existed -- it asserts that he had hit singles, but fails to provide any verification of where they were "hits" (spoiler alert, not in RPM). And for "referencing", it just contextlessly bulletpoints a list of mostly primary source websites that aren't support for notability, without footnoting anything in the article body to any of them.
On a WP:BEFORE search, further, I didn't find enough coverage to salvage this -- apart from one concert review in The Globe and Mail on the occasion of him playing the El Mocambo in 1980, I otherwise only get local coverage in Saskatoon, glancing namechecks of his existence in sources that aren't about him in any sense, and tangential hits for other unrelated Brian Plummers (such as Bill Pullman's character in The Equalizer).
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have more and better sourcing than he has. Bearcat ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Bearcat ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: it looks very much as though this was written as a WP:NOTMEMORIAL... the only other edit the article creator has made to Wikipedia is to add some information about Jack Hazebroek to the article about the Rolling Stones Mobile Studio, and Hazebroek's name also appears in this article, so I imagine it was written as a tribute to Mr. Plummer, having worked with him. Richard3120 ( talk) 20:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Feli Ferraro

Feli Ferraro (  | 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 WP:GNG, coverage is limited to passing mentions and professional profiles in non-independent sources. The listed song credits are misleading, as she is not the primary recording artist of any of them; professional songwriters do not typically receive the same level of coverage for their work, and should not be presumed notable on the basis of having collaborated on notable works in the absence of actual RS coverage about their influence on the work. Searching online did not turn up any coverage better than what is already cited. signed, Rosguill talk 16:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Richard Raymond (pianist)

Richard Raymond (pianist) (  | 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)

Nothing on this guy but articles about a student of his, fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 18:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep Article was unsourced, and still requires some cleanup and improvement, however the subject is notable under GNG and WP:NMUSIC, particularly criteria 1 and 9. I added a few sources found quickly from a google search. A deeper search may reveal more. Bgv. ( talk) 23:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
A competition is only "major" enough to fulfill NMUSIC #9 if it gets WP:GNG-worthy media coverage that reports its winners as news, and is not "major" enough to pass that criterion if you have to rely on its own self-published press releases because third-party coverage treating it as newsworthy is non-existent. So he hasn't been shown to pass #9 at all, and with only one real media source about him he has not yet been shown to pass #1 either. Bearcat ( talk) 15:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm glad to see one article that may satisfy the WP:GNG criterion, however, we'd need more sustained coverage in order for it to actually pass WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 16:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
With respect to the concern of competitions not being major, I only now noticed that the citation in the article is to the subject's self-published website, however the wins have been confirmed by other sources (e.g. [26], [27]). I'll digress that the competitions cited are not "major" enough to have their winners make the mainstream news, however the status of winning of (specifically) the Stepping Stone Competition has been cited by mainstream news sources in their determination of endorsements for young musicians (e.g. [28], [29], and less significant coverage [30]). Focusing more heavily on NMUSIC #1 and the GNG, please see 1 and 2 above, along with this news article, and this inclusion of his biography backing the claims of notability from the Quebec Contemporary Music Society. For what it's worth, his discography was aired on the radio, as demonstrated here, and here. I will plug a few of these into the article, hopefully by the time anyone is reading this. Bgv. ( talk) 01:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Jon Forshee

Jon Forshee (  | 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)

Bio of a composer/academic fails GNG, NBIO, NACADEMIC, NMUSIC. The independent sources do not show WP:SIGCOV; WP:BEFORE search turns up no other reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage or evidence of notability under any of the other SNG guidelines that might apply. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 23:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, France, California, Colorado, Michigan, New York, and Ohio. WCQuidditch 00:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete -- composer/researcher doing good things to advance his career that are pretty typical for composers at this stage. Significantly TOOSOON at this point. On the non-academic side, lacking the awards or major ensembles (those not dedicated to producing student work) to pass notability; on the WP:PROF side, does not have academic appointments or the sort of extensive influence to pass there. (Some of the journals are important in the field, but book/CD reviews are not articles.) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    These are mostly fair points. Not sure what the "TOOSOON" means--too soon to have a wiki article? Regarding academic appointment, a Google search shows that Forshee was a visiting professor and now instructor. As to the ensembles performing Forshee's compositions, the Callithumpian Consort and Trio Kobayashi are, according to their own websites, not dedicated to performing student works (they list Elliott Carter, Schuittke, Huber, Scelsi, Cage, Lachenmann, Richard Barrett, Jürg Frey, Larry Polansky, James Tenney, basically all widely known composers on the international scene). The articles by Forshee don't appear to be book reviews or CD reviews, but neither do they appear to be rigorous scholarly research articles; they seem to be somewhere in between: interpretive analytical essays? The one in Computer Music Journal is an early review of software by the pioneering computer music composer Trevor Wishart. Part of the motivation for this article is that Forshee is one of the few notable (or borderline notable) students of composer Anthony Davis, who just had his Met Opera premiere of his Malcolm X this season. Dolemites ( talk) 18:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Notability cannot WP:INHERITED from Anthony Davis or anyone else; for each subject it must be established independently according to the criteria. No articles by Forshee can be used establish his notability, only what independent and reliable sources have to say about him with "significant coverage." Dclemens1971 ( talk) 03:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Reign in Slumber

Reign in Slumber (  | 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. The main notability claim being attempted here is that one of its members was previously associated with a different band, which is not "inherently" notable without WP:GNG-worthy sourcing -- but seven of the 16 footnotes here (close to half) are the band's own self-published content about itself on their own website or Bandcamp, which is not notability-supporting sourcing as it isn't independent of them, and the other nine aren't coverage about this band, but either glancingly mention this band in the process of being about something else, or are completely tangential sourcing about people associated with this band doing other unrelated things that have nothing to do with this band, none of which helps to support this band's notability either.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have much, much better sourcing than this. Bearcat ( talk) 20:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Reign in Slumber, is truly metal music band in Cambodia. this sub genre in it's very very rare find better sourced than this to support with their action. Without fund and most people came there just looking for free music during the music in Cambodia just built-up. Ten years they're struggle to survive, without them this sub genre will disappear in Cambodia. Please consider to accept my reason. Thanks JammyKH ( talk) 21:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
If having a wikipedia article helps them survive, that's PROMO and not helping us keep the article. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia does not exist as a public relations platform to help emerging bands build their careers — making it big comes first and then the Wikipedia article comes second, not vice versa. Bearcat ( talk) 13:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I just improved some info and add more better sourced. Thanks JammyKH ( talk) 22:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Source 22 is the only one that's in what Source Tool identifies as a RS, but it's a very trivial mention. This is about the band [31], trivial coverage and I'm unsure if it's even a RS. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: In cambodia, for a small subgenre music not getting any interest at all, Only POP, Hip-hop, Romantic and Khmer Traditional that's people acceptable. Metal in Cambodia is about to die. Reign in Slumber is real, they exist, they have the real music, real album and real performance. [32] [33] Camboculture27 ( talk) 03:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The notability test doesn't hinge on whether or not they're real, it hinges on whether or not they have received third-party attention in reliable sources. Bearcat ( talk) 15:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
What proper reliable sourcing is making this "satisfactory"? Bearcat ( talk) 13:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: They deserve to be kept here for retention purposes. JammyKH ( talk) 12:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia's inclusion criteria do not hinge on what they "deserve", Wikipedia's inclusion criteria hinge on WP:GNG-worthy reliable sourcing, of which you still haven't shown any. Bearcat ( talk) 13:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • CU note The three keep !votes above were all written by the same person using three different accounts. I've struck through two of them, and blocked all three accounts. Girth Summit (blether) 16:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Magdalena Hinterdobler

Magdalena Hinterdobler (  | 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 soprano has not received significant coverage in independent sources, bar this one article.

Citations 2, 3, and 7 are from institutions with which Hinterdobler has been associated. The rest provide insignificant coverage, often not more than a half-sentence.

As there is only one source which is both independent and provides significant coverage, the relevant notability criteria ( WP:BASIC/ WP:MUSICBIO) are not met. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:35, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. I spent about an hour trying to find WP:SIGCOV prior to this being taken to AFD. You can see my comments on the nominator's talk page as we discussed this before taking it to AFD. I looked at over two dozen critical reviews, and while there are many reviews of the operas she has been in, she is only mentioned in passing or not at all in those reviews. Likewise on reviews of her recordings. The most we get is a single sentence (two at most; and those are rare) with a general critique of her performance. For example, The Guardian review only mentions her name in the title list of leading singers but never actually talks about her contribution to the recording. This is not in-depth. The only in-depth independent source is the first source cited, Opern News magazine article. If a couple more sources of this latter kind are found that would prove WP:MUSICBIO and WP:SIGCOV are met. Please ping me if sources with in-depth independent coverage are located and I will gladly change my vote to keep. 4meter4 ( talk) 00:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per WP:SINGER #6 "having performed two lead roles at major opera houses." -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 02:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes there is that SNG, but I honestly think that we need to deprecate that in the same way that the RFC on WP:NSPORTS deprecated many of its similar SNG language. We really shouldn't be building articles on singers that can't meet WP:SIGCOV for verifiability reasons; particularly on BLPS per Wikipedia:BLPSOURCES. 4meter4 ( talk) 04:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Your opinion that that SNG should be deprecated does not mean that that SNG no longer applies. What is not verifiable about this article? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 19:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I never said that SNGs don't apply. SNGs by their nature often contradict other policies, which is why they are often contentious at AFD. It’s perfectly fine to make a claim to notability using an SNG. It’s also equally fine to criticize the SNG for being a bad policy because it doesn’t align with other policy language elsewhere. There have been many RFCs over SNG language, and several of them have led to policy changes that have→ deprecated certain SNGs within the the last five years. I think it’s reasonable to point to those RFCs as an example of how in certain content areas we have moved towards requiring more in-depth coverage. The need to re-examine our policies only gets established if people start raising that issue in discussions at AFDs. That’s what happened in the NSPORTS case prior to the NSPORTS RFC. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 20:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes, you are allowed to criticize SNGs, but your opinions of the SNGs are not valid reasons to delete an article passing it; neither is the fact that other SNGs being deprecated sufficient reason for overriding this currently standing and completely valid SNG to delete this well-done article. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 23:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
BeanieFan11 Not true. Per WP:SNG "Articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found, or if the topic is not suitable for an encyclopedia." Those calling for deletion are making a valid argument that this particular article lacks adequate sourcing. The main issue of contention here is whether a bunch of low level not in-depth coverage constitutes "adequate sourcing". Those of us voting delete are specifically making the argument that it does not constitute adequate sourcing, which is a valid reason to override an SNG per SNG policy. 4meter4 ( talk) 23:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
May be, not required to be. The guideline was never intended to get rid of well-done articles like this. In what way is Wikipedia benefited by deleting here? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 23:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
In my view, this is likely a case of WP:TOOSOON where the subject is likely to prove notability in the future, and we have simply jumped the gun and created an article before the independent sources have come into existence that contain in-depth coverage. I think it's best practice to wait to write articles on BLPs when we have a minimum of two in-depth sources for a variety of reasons; many of them articulated at WP:NOT, WP:VERIFIABILITY, WP:BLP, and WP:OR. One of the major issues in this article is that the majority of the biographical content is cited to PR materials written by talent management and PR firms for theaters, opera houses, etc. It's not best practice to build articles on BLPs from materials of this kind. We do the encyclopedia a disservice when we don't uphold quality standards that emphasize building biographical content within biography pages from independent materials. Not doing so, allows wikipedia to become a tool of promotion for talent management and PR firms, which ultimately creates a conflict of interest between wikipedia's goal of building an encyclopedia, and the potential to use wikipedia for other motives. One of our best means of quality control in terms of both verifiability and maintaining NPOV is making sure we build articles from independent sources with in-depth coverage. That's why we have WP:GNG. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 00:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
As far as I can tell, only six of the 21 references in the article are from Hinterdobler's opera houses? What parts of the article are not verifiable or original research? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes and they also are the most used sources, which verify over half of the article including almost all of the biographical information. The other sources only verify specific roles in specific opera performances. Asserting "only six" doesn't actually look at what information and how much of that information is coming from those non-independent marketing materials. If you can't see the ethical problem here for using marketing tools to verify a BLP article I don't know what to say further. We have two very different ideas about the ethics of editing and sourcing articles on BLPs. 4meter4 ( talk) 15:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
There are also briefer mentions that are not mere listings of who sang which role: "eine resolute, selbstbewusste Eva" (a resolute, self-confident Eva); "auch die 'kleinen' Walküren ... Magdalena Hinterdobler, die auch die Gutrune sang, ... sangen ansprechend" (the 'lesser' valkyries too, ... Magdalena Hinterdobler, who also sang Gutrune, ... were equal to their roles)—this compressed Ring is also not in the article. I suspect there are similar short reviews of her performances in other magazines and newspapers, and the article isn't reflecting that coverage because of a desire to focus on her leading roles, use English-language sources where possible, and / or avoid negative coverage. From the point of view of notability, however, I believe that mass of small stuff about her, together with at least one extended biographical article (I don't see the Frankfurter Allgemeine cited anywhere; has anyone searched there for coverage of her joining the company?), puts her over the top. Yngvadottir ( talk) 02:55, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Lightburst can you please identify more than one source with "significant coverage" to meet WP:BASIC. The whole point of the nominator is that there is only one (not multiple sources) with significant independent coverage. Both Yngvadottir and myself have confirmed this is the case which is why I voted delete. Yngvadottir was able to locate several reviews mentioning the subject in one or two sentences but specifically stated they didn't contain significant coverage. Asserting that BASIC is met is just not true with the current sources in evidence. You are the only commenter here asserting BASIC is met, and you have provided no evidence to substantiate that argument. Basic states, "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published[4] secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[5] and independent of the subject.[6] Please produce a second source with significant coverage. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The next section after BASIC reads People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. and A person who does not meet these additional criteria may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notability. You do not need coverage to prove notability, you can meet a subject specific guideline instead. Dream Focus 16:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes. You don't need to repeat yourself Dream Focus. I am aware of the SNG guideline. That still doesn't change the fact that BASIC isn't met which is why you yourself made an argument based on criteria 6 of WP:SINGER. That's fine if that is the WP:CONSENUS opinion. I personally am of the opinion that criteria 6 of SINGER is a poor predictor of notability, runs afoul of WP:BLPSOURCES policy, and is so subjective in its meaning and interpretation that it isn't a well crafted policy. After this AFD closes, regardless of the outcome, I am considering creating an RFC along the lines of Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability which deprecated similar SNG language for athletes. In my opinion BASIC should be our guide. We need at least two sources with in-depth independent coverage to build an article on any BLP in my opinion to meet the spirit of our policy guidelines at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
My rationale stands and we disagree so please observe WP:COAL and I will do the same. Lightburst ( talk) 18:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note to closer. Please consider the evidence and strength of the arguments in your close. I strongly urge you to ignore/overrule arguments made without supporting evidence. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The subject specific guidelines exist for a reason. Someone can be notable for their accomplishments, not just for media coverage of them. WP:SINGER #6 Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03s64z1 distinguished Austrian pianist Rudolf Buchbinder, in London for a rare appearance at the Royal Festival Hall, and the rising star conductor Lionel Bringuier. Pianist Mark Swartzentruber will perform live on the show, ahead of his concert at Kings Place tomorrow. So she is in an ensemble that contains a distinguished pianists, a conductor called a "rising star" in an opera review, and a guy with his own concerts and notable accomplishments. http://markswartzentruber.com/biography/ She was on an album that got a long review. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/feb/14/bruch-die-loreley-review-andrew-clements She is a member of the Frankfurt ensemble, a notable ensemble which she has performed at major opera houses with. https://oper-frankfurt.de/en/ensemble/ensemble/?detail=1256 So a singer can be notable for having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. She performed as Elisabetta in Verdi's Don Carlos Dream Focus 16:14, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Just added another RS and performance. Gamaliel ( talk) 19:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Although there is some LOW-level coverage, there is not enough SIGCOV. Performing with a notable ensemble doesn’t automatically provide notability in its own right to an individual. - SchroCat ( talk) 22:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Oper Frankfurt: Coverage seems to be too trivial to have an article about the individual, but they do seem notable in context of the opera company. Oaktree b ( talk) 00:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Oaktree b I would disagree with that assessment. There are hundreds (perhaps thousands) of more significant singers with biographical entries in music encyclopedias that have been resident performers at Oper Frankfurt during its nearly 250 year long history. If we were to look through the Großes Sängerlexikon for example or The Grove Book of Opera Singers I would imagine we could compile a list of more than a thousand singers who were at one time or another employed by Oper Frankfurt as a resident artist; and all of those would be encyclopedic by virtue of being in an encyclopedia. If we are going to start covering indiviudal singers in an opera company article it should be the most prominent ones. Hinterdobler is a rather minor figure from an institutional point of view, and currently the article doesn't talk about any of its artists from a historical framework. It would be WP:UNDUEWEIGHT. A company like Oper Frankfurt at any given time employs close to a hundred leading singers in a season ( Currently there are over 90 leading performers with the company between resident and guest artists) They have over 20 operas in their repertory for the 2024-2025 season between revivals of older production and their plans of more than a dozen new productions. Focusing on a single leading artist, particularly one with little coverage, seems inappropriate; particularly when many of their other artists would be high profile artists with lots of WP:SIGCOV. I note that many of the singers currently employed by them have articles, as well as lots of past performers. 4meter4 ( talk) 01:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. She has received positive critical comment in at least two recognized sources. Further searching in the German press would no doubt reveal more.-- Ipigott ( talk) 12:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Lean Keep (not familiar with opera, hence not a "solid" keep). Appears to meet the music SNG (which itself should be sufficient, otherwise such criteria are useless) and the nom admits there is already significant coverage. Not to mention the article looks pretty decent – and NBASIC also states that If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 19:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep I added a magazine review to the article. I think we have enough to show that the person is notable and I agree with BeanieFan11 regarding NBASIC. I came here from following the article at DYK. I was the editor who promoted the nomination DYK Bruxton ( talk) 20:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: I am the first author, and I don't care if this article is deleted or not.
    • I was pleasantly busy over the weekend, - sorry for being late to this, and thank you all who added to the article!! (That sort of collaboration is Wikipedia as I like it.)
    • My first indicator of whether a singer is notable often is - as you will guess - my own first-hand personal opinion, for this one as for many others. I hope that everybody who has commented will have listened to her speaking and singing, Der Traumgörge. I saw her (only) in that opera, which was sort of a premiere because the conductor says it was the first unabridged rendering of Zemlinsky's music which had been due for performance (and rehearsed) in 1907, but was not given then for anti-semitic reasons, so had a late premiere in 1980. The only other of "my" singer articles suggested to be deleted was Johannes Hill (so I guess my opinion was right so far).
    • I didn't know WP:SINGER but thank Michael Bednarek for pointing that out. It supports my thought that our view on notability should perhaps rely more on what a person factually does (primary), than what others think about what she does (secondary). - For comparison: just imagine we'd require a contemporary review for Bach's cantatas, we'd have an article about one of the around 200 extant. They remained mostly unpublished and unnoticed for a century after he died. - What she does - two leading roles at a leading house - is objective, what others write about it is subjective, and whether we regard what they write as in-depth or not adds another layer of subjectivity.
    • In this particular case, I looked if sources supported my opinion that she is notable, and found enough to nominate for DYK, and obviously enough for the reviewer and for most of the readers that day. I simply had no time to look further for more facts and other sources, sorry about that but it happens with my focus on recent death articles and Bach's cantatas that turn 300 week after week (and real life, Bach cantatas in concert and the pleasant company that comes with it), so I again thank those who did that. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • ps: I went to church yesterday to one that was also up for deletion. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Responses:
      • @ Yngvadottir, thank you for retrieving sources. You asked for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: sorry, it was hidden under FAZ (Brachmann, Jan (27 February 2024). "Ein Lichtgedicht". FAZ (in German). Retrieved 5 March 2024.) Sorry, I thought FAZ is easier than all that German, and would say BBC, not British Broadcasting Corporation. The reviewer wrote about her singing in a half-sentence at the beginning "frisch, schön und so vorbildlich textverständlich" (fresh, beautiful and with such exemplary diction). I can add that to the article. As for the Mozart reviews, I never saw them, and Mozart seems to be past for her vocal development; her voice was possibly never ideally suited for singing Mozart. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC) - I added that review, and also the Chrysothemis review. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • @ 4meter4, I added the Clements review of Die Loreley. I am not surprised that the reviewer of a first recording of an opera by a famous composer deals more with the opera than the singers. The review proves, however, that the recording was noticed internationally. - I have no idea why you'd mark what opera houses say about her - typically just a factual list of roles - as "promotional". The Chemnitz bio had a quote from a review. I added the complete review now. But why would you believe the same quote in the Chemnitz bio was promotional? Again, this review (Spinola) of a world premiere deals more with the piece than the singers. It describes her lead role at length. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        @ Gerda Arendt I already wrote this to you in another discussion. I will copy paste it here: "All work products/publications by a performing arts organization are intended as a tool of promotion as well as a tool for information. Opera companies/theatres are businesses and they have an invested interest in promoting their company/theatre and its performers in order to sell tickets. There is a commercial aspect to the performing arts, and the materials that an opera company/theatre produces for public consumption are directly connected to its commercial interests. This is why we should avoid using sources produced by theatres/opera companies as much as possible. Artist bios are written by paid talent management and PR companies. Most professional singers have a paid agent who specializes in marketing opera singers, and those agents often write the bios hosted on theatre/opera company websites. Or the opera company/theatre itself will have an in house PR/marketing staff member responsible for writing those materials. There is therefore, a direct COI with these kinds of sources because they are written as a marketing tool for commercial gain. When possible, its best not to use PR materials of this type for ethical reasons." If an artist is notable, we shouldn't need to use these materials because the independent significant coverage should be there to source the article. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        I already responded in that other discussion and also copy paste here: "I don't know what you normally read, but I see that Oper Frankfurt and Hessisches Staatstheater write their own bios, and their own high-class program books. - German opera houses in general are public institutions, financed mostly by tax money."
        Adding: what in the following Frankfurt bio is promotional and not ethical to be used?
        "Magdalena Hinterdobler, who sang her first Evas in a new Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg at Oper Frankfurt last winter, joined the Ensemble in the 2023/24 season, during which she sang Grete in a new production of Zemlinsky’s Der Traumgörge / George the Dreamer and Elisabeth in Don Carlo, which is followed by Chrysothemis in the first revival of last season's new Elektra. Other highlights in 2022/23 included Agathe in Der Freischütz at Theater Chemnitz and Chrysothemis (role debut) in Elektra at Tirol’s Landestheater in Innsbruck. She trained at the University for Music and Theatre in Munich and Bavaria’s August Everding Theatre Academy with Andreas Schmidt, and in Helmut Deutsch’s Lieder classes. She was a member of the Ensemble at Oper Leipzig from 2014 - 2022, where her many roles included Rusalka, Micaëla in Carmen and Marie in The Bartered Bride. Word of her interpretation of Anna in the world premiere of Gerd Kühr’s Paradiese spread far and wide. While working in Leipzig with the Gewandhaus Orchester she also sang many Mozart and Italian roles, including Liù in Puccini’s Turandot and, most recently, Mimì in La Bohème. Her concert repertoire ranges from the baroque to contemporary music. She has appeared with many well known conductors and orchestras including Stuttgart’s Bach Collegium, the Munich Radio Orchestra, the Hamburg and Bamberg symphony orchestras, Dresden Philharmonic and the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchester. She also enjoys singing Lieder with the pianist Gerold Huber. A CD of early Wagner Lieder was released by CPO in 2013, the year she appeared with the Munich Radio Orchestra for the first time as Dorella in Wagner’s Das Liebesverbot / The Ban on Love, which was followed by roles in Wagner operas in Leipzig including Ortlinde and Gutrune in the Ring des Nibelungen under GMD Ulf Schirmer. She continues her journey into young dramatic roles this season with Agathe in Weber’s Der Freischütz at Theater Chemnitz and Chrysothemis in Elektra at the Landestheater in Tirol."
        Not all of this is even used, because I don't like lists of famous orchestras and conductors. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        Gerda I'm not going to get in a back and forth. Wikipedia's policies on COI, non-independent sources are well articulated on multiple policy pages. WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT behaviour isn't helpful. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        I am just trying to understand. Simple question: that Ring in Leipzig - the review says she sang "a minor valkyrie" and "Gutrune". The Leipzig Opera has the full list of the cast, and is - to my knowledge - the only source for the fact that she was "Ortlinde". The source is used only for that detail but you tagged it as promotional. Should we therefore omit that detail, loosing precision? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • @ Michael Bednarek, thank you for the reference for year and place of birth, dated 2008. I used it for more detail but it was marked promotional. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        • 4meter4's objections, in this case, to material in a program booklet by a public broadcaster are in contradiction to WP:RS. If reliable sources collate an artist's performance data, Wikipedia editors are free, and indeed encouraged, to use that secondary source. That's a widely followed and uncontroversial principle. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 00:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Information published by one's employer (the theatres at which she has performed) is most certainly not independent coverage. The theatre's website or publicatons can be cited to show that she actually performed a role there, but they should not be cited for the theatre's opinion of her performance, as they have a conflict of interest in that they want to promote themselves by promoting their performers. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 03:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Correct, but no opinion or assessment was cited from those sites in this case. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 06:39, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. I'm persuaded by the additional sources Yngvadottir located and analyzed as well as by the WP:NBASIC guidance that BeanieFan11 pointed out: multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. While there is the caveat that this coverage should not be trivial, I don't think it is in this case, based on the measure of trivial coverage provided in the notability guideline (the bare mention of Three Blind Mice), as the coverage identified through this review process examines and weighs the tropic's performance quality. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 22:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    If that measure is supposed to be an upper threshold for "trivial", as you imply, then the book-length coverage from the second example must be the lower threshold for "significant"... JoelleJay ( talk) 00:49, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't mean to imply the Three Blind Mice example is the upper threshold for trivial mentions (it's possible for coverage that is more than the Three Blind Mice example to still be trivial; a hypothetical In college, Binton Krill was in a band called Five Eye Lice. Five Eye Lice toured the West Coast in 1988.). I nevertheless think there's sufficient coverage that rises so above the Three Blind Mice example to the point that it's not trivial coverage. As for lower thresholds, I don't think there's consensus in the Wikipedia community for book-length coverage to be considered a lower threshold for significant coverage. With the exception of, say, multivolume biographies/histories, book-length coverage probably tends to be expected to be the upper threshold/expectation for significant coverage. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 06:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I'm just not convinced that a couple sentences of praise here and there in reviews really contributes to BASIC, let alone constitutes SIGCOV. Such brief descriptions of performances are absolutely routine in theater reviews and offer no evidence the subject has received sustained secondary coverage. We should not be constructing biographies out of 80% non-independent sources and 20% disjoint quotes on isolated performances -- how can we capture BALASP if separate pieces of information have not been independently contextualized with each other? JoelleJay ( talk) 00:38, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Right now this looks like No consensus as editors are very divided about whether or not notability is established by the existing sources. I notice that a great deal of new content and new sourcs have been added since this article's nomination; a source review of this new content would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Yuno Miles

Yuno Miles (  | 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)

as much as i love yuno, the only reliable source that talks about him is this, which makes him not notable Authenyo ( talk) 00:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply

i typed this crying knowing that big wikipedia will delete yuno miles Authenyo ( talk) 00:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
He is notable in my opinion; while I am not a fan of his music he does have almost 1 million followers on spotify and has been drawn even further into the public eye by his Drake diss. OJSimpsonLover ( talk) 03:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I don't think that this page should be entirely erased. It has a good structure, some notability, and there's other pages that should probably be deleted. I vote no for this page deletion. Also why did that OJSimpsonLover fella get blocked??? It says for vandalism but he was just giving his opinion. TheEpicApartmentLord ( talk) 16:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
(insert reminder of WP:NOTAVOTE and to actually provide links or a reference to someone else's comment here instead of just saying "some notability")
OJSimpsonLover was blocked for vandalizing articles. That said, @ Air on White, I'm not sure that means why their comment should be discarded. Only sockpuppets have a strike-comments policy. Or was there something I've missed? Aaron Liu ( talk) 19:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I've removed the striking of the comment. Liz Read! Talk! 01:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
OJSimpsonLover was blocked for vandalism and his inappropriate username. However, he was not just a blatant vandal, but also a subtler troll: some of his comments appear to be in good faith and were aimed at confusing other users and administrators, making his block less likely. I also believe he was a sockpuppet for his demonstrated familiarity with the customs and policies of Wikipedia and his technical proficiency in areas such as wikitext and referencing. I therefore believe it was reasonable for me to assume that his comment was intended to disrupt the Wikipedia project and should have been struck through. Air on White ( talk) 04:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
They have not made any comments that I find questionable and do not seem to be familiar with Wikipedia at all. Aaron Liu ( talk) 22:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
This isn't the place to discuss vandalism or sockpuppetry, so I'll end this discussion here. But I'm willing to continue this discussion (at another page) if anyone is interested, particularly if someone is making an SPI case. Air on White ( talk) 01:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC) edited Air on White ( talk) 01:52, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/music/news-who-yuno-miles-fans-react-youtuber-releases-hilarious-drake-diss-response-metro-boomin-s-challenge Yes No WP:RSP: user-generated Yes No
https://www.rapreviews.com/2023/11/yuno-miles-yuno-i-cant-rap/ Yes Yes Yes Yes
https://www.sescoops.com/wwe/rapper-yuno-miles-releases-wwe-diss-track-im-beefing-with-the-wwe Yes Yes Probably, website has multiple writers and this one has a degree Yes Yes
https://pitchfork.com/features/article/the-age-of-shitpost-modernism/ Yes Yes No One example with only one mention No
https://gizmodo.com/saga-bbl-drizzy-drake-kendrick-lamar-metro-boomin-1851470820 Yes Yes No Only one mention as "The Meme Diss Track"; in the article's slides. 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}}.
  • Here's a table. I don't think two is enough, is it? Aaron Liu ( talk) 11:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I believe most editors would consider two enough. Air on White ( talk) 20:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
SE Scoops is two videos and two quotes of his, with about 5 lines of text otherwise, might be a RS but that's hardly extensive coverage. Maybe 1/2 a source, being generous. I'd still like to see more than these two sources, neither of which is extensive. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
What do you mean? The entire article is about a diss track he released.
I do agree that two sources is a bit far from keeping, though. Aaron Liu ( talk) 00:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Now that pythoncoder has provided a video reference with The Tonight Show, I think that tips the scales towards a weak keep. Aaron Liu ( talk) 19:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - he appears in two articles that count towards GNG, but there isn't enough notable articles at the moment for a stronger keep. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 04:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Speedy delete - 𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘦𝘭'𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘮𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘺, 07:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Uh, speedy per what? Aaron Liu ( talk) 11:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    AskeeaeWiki, is this even a vote? Per what? dxneo ( talk) 13:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Seems like he passes GNG based on the sources so far. Other stuff that may or may not count, some from the draft version:
    From WP:THENEEDLEDROP:
    ... per Wikipedia policy regarding self-published sources, these reviews should never be used as third-party sources about living people.
    Granted, what you linked isn't a review, it's an interview. But given the discussion is about what third-party sources could be used to justify keeping an article about Yuno Miles, I think this still fairly doesn't fit. It also doesn't help that Fantano isn't a journalist, let alone the fact that using YouTube links (of which this article currently uses two, both linking to Yuno Miles' own songs) is already considered generally unreliable per WP:RSPYT. Cadenrock1 ( talk) 03:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think this discussion needs more time so I'm relisting it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete coverage seems weak, fails WP:NMUSIC.- KH-1 ( talk) 02:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • weak keep, I personally think Miles is a notable but unreported figure, having a large following but lacking news coverage. This means has and will continue to have his page created many times before being locked. ( Discuss Roastedbeanz1 contribs) 17:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Roastedbeanz1, why is your signature bearing @ Not0nshoree. Also, I didn't get your argument here. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Yuno Miles is very much notable. I know there's a stigma against making pages for every insignificant "soundcloud rapper", but rest assured, Yuno Miles is not one of them. ☞ Rim < Talk | Edits > 18:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I agree with keeping Yuno Miles on Wikipedia. He is already a popular rapper no matter if its meme rap such as "4 Wheeler" or the "BBL Drizzy Freestyle." I think it way to late to make that happen. Diamondpro114 ( talk) 23:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Show evidence using sources that meets WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I can't believe I have to say this but Wikipedia doesn't care that you personally think this article subject is notable. Our subjective judgments are irrelevant to AFD decisions. The question is, are there sufficient reliable sources to establish notability? Are the sources located by User:pythoncoder and any other editors adequate to demonstrate GNG? That's the important question here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: This article doesn't meet GNG, source analysis lacks WP:SIGCOV and intentionally, I don't succumbed with the rationales of being "a fan of a certain musician." Per the state of the article, I was checking redirect to see if the "Hood Rejects" do exist but not. At this point, when sources of an article is not enough to establish notability, it becomes deletion or redirecting. However, there is no room for redirecting and mostly, delete. I have critically accessed the sources presently in the article and some doesn't relate to WP:RS. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 01:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ SafariScribe Could you explain how the two sources I've assessed and the OnesToWatch source from pythoncoder don't meet GNG? Aaron Liu ( talk) 03:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Aaron Liu, two sources aren't enough for me to justify whether an article is notable. There isn't any significant coverage of this individual as a musician whatsoever. Also remember that "celebrities" may be famous but not notable. One may have millions of followers, yet neither has he/her been covered in multiple news source. Per my experience so far, they are usually appearing in interviews, some which are not reliable or secondary per WP:RS. While being regarding !voting is not deletion, I am talking about the pure simple fact here and that the truth of the matter. Should I analyse the arguments too to see the argument coming from keep if not most, "he is notable, I have heard the song", "he is famous, I am a fan", etc. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    In analysis, for example, no weight will be given to "He is notable in my opinion; while I am not a fan of his music he does have almost 1 million followers on spotify and has been drawn even further into the public eye by his Drake diss." Notability is not ones opinion. If that, then, my father is notable in my mind. The second was I don't think that this page should be entirely erased. It has a good structure, some notability, and there's other pages that should probably be deleted. I vote no for this page deletion. Also why did that OJSimpsonLover fella get blocked??? It says for vandalism but he was just giving his opinion. Here, we don't believe in WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST. If the editor thinks the other articles like that merits deletion, so be it, nominate it or leave it. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Oaktree b and Not0nshoree argued the article lacking sources and not meeting GNG.
    Then the source analysis table generated also good. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep Yuno Miles' music is unique. Also his song was trending on YouTube and hit music charts. Also he will hit 1m subs soon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedun ( talkcontribs)

User:Freedun, I want to know how you know about anything called AFD when you literally joined some minutes ago. What was your previous account? Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
what is AFD? I dont think i had an account from the past but i edited my schools wikipedia page in the past so maybe i did but im not sure Freedun ( talk) 04:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Freedun, that is my point. What is the school and your former name. It might help us know how to analyse your argument as it may lay on "a new user". Tell me the account and why you left after writing your schools page. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
uh sorry dude I'm not comfortable telling you what high school i went to... Freedun ( talk) 05:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
It is unusual a new editor coming to !vote in an AFD. There is something going on. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
uh ok? Freedun ( talk) 06:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
actually imma say weak keep like Roasted beanz Freedun ( talk) 06:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
http://www.onestowatch.com/en/blog/meet-yuno-miles-the-internets-favorite-rapper Yes Was about the rapper No Ones to watch is a music blog and by the virtue of looking at the written content, it made me feel to notify people of a notable blog it is. Another example Bella Naija. No Blog, equally advertorial. No
https://www.theneedledrop.com/interviews/2023/11/a-conversation-with-yuno-miles Yes An interview should always be independent as the person interviewed always say about him; those which aren't verifiable at most times. No Per WP:THENEEDLEDROP. No Its an interview per WP:INTERVIEW or related. No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrJWNQSIoNE No Clip of played music. The full show should have contained other stuffs. Yes The show is reliable and notable as well. No In the context, the music was played within any discussion of it's nature, etc. I could have taken it as a review but no! 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}}.

Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Graeme Blevins

Graeme Blevins (  | 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. While there are a number of sources, I couldn't find anything that is both reliable and provides WP:SIGCOV. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 04:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 04:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Thanks for flagging. Have improved the article with additional authoritative news sources. We are talking here about one of the very best saxophone players of his generation. In the Brit Awards 2024 (the leading awards in UK for music), RAYE won more awards than any other artist, so for Blevins to have a track named after him on her album is notable. He has been regularly in the bands of several household name stars and played in a Grammy award winning album. Wikiwikiwwwest ( talk) 00:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Still try to include more sources that contribute to the WP:GNG criteria. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 13:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Coverage in the article is now about the Raye group, which isn't helping this person's individual notability... Listed here [38], but it's always in a long list of other people. Playing on an album with a group of others doesn't meet notability here. Oaktree b ( talk) 13:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 05:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Alley of the Dolls (band)

Alley of the Dolls (band) (  | 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)

Newly created article, PROD declined. Sourcing does not establish WP:GNG being met. WP:BEFORE brings up only a couple of brief reviews of their EP. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 22:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Happy to add additional citations to the EP as many exist MusicForeverYours ( talk) 01:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Added citations to additional reviews, more are available but not always in English as the band has a lot of support in none English speaking countries so reviews are not in English as is requested by Wikipedia. MusicForeverYours ( talk) 15:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Source 18 is a RS for the album review; the rest used now in the article is primary or non-RS. I can only find the Spill Magazine review, so without any other sources, the band is not at notability. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify: If more citations for this article exist, they should absolutely be added. it's free realist 9 16:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Two additional reviews and citations added to establish bands obvious notability. More available but dont want the article to just be a list of magazine reviews. Happy to add more if this view isnt shared. MusicForeverYours ( talk) 15:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Aida Vee

Aida Vee (  | 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. little to no 3rd party articles detailing artist Minmarion ( talk) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 04:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Adi Oasis

Adi Oasis (  | 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 has been moved disruptively by the creator that has COI without improvements since last decline, so I am taking this to AfD. I cannot tell whether this passes notability, but as I can tell from the comments of the reviewers. Before search shows primarily stories on her releasing songs and albums, and sources listed are rather mostly interviews and videos. Toadette Edit! 15:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Lya Stern

Lya Stern (  | 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 is mainly a resume. Most of the sources in the article consist of dead links from websites that are related to Lya Stern; the rest of the sources either have brief mentions of her or don't mention her at all. After doing a Google search to see if there were sources that could be added to the article, the only significant coverage I found of her was from a website that listed Wikipedia as a source. The rest of the information I found was from her YouTube channel and mentions of her from her students. As a result, she doesn't met WP:GNG or WP:NBLP. That Tired Tarantula Burrow 20:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Just agreeing with That Tired Tarantula above -- @Atlantic306 you have linked to reviews for a different musician. If Lya Stern had an Allmusic staff bio, that would be relevant, but I could not find one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Sorry about that, have struck my vote and comment. In my defence the erroneous AllMusic bio is the first reference in the article but I should have noticed, imv Atlantic306 ( talk) 22:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Lovari (musician)

Lovari (musician) (  | 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)

Doesn't seem to have any notable or significant credits. JDDJS ( talk to mesee what I've done) 03:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References for Lovari on Wheel Of Fortune (2023): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV8rMTIQ2C0
https://bobbymgsk.wordpress.com/2023/02/01/wheel-of-fortune-1-31-23/
References for Lovari on Judge Jerry Springer (2022):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U78Iy9fFQkc
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt25965282/releaseinfo/
https://followmy.tv/episodes/2487792/judge-jerry/3x104/103
References for Lovari on Match Game (2019):
https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/match-game-season-four-viewer-votes/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5672484/characters/nm2102281
References for Lovari in The Barn 2 (2022):
https://dailydead.com/horror-highlights-8-found-dead-the-harbinger-the-barn-part-ii/
https://hellhorror.com/movies/the-barn-part-ii-movie-7804.html
https://podcasts.apple.com/es/podcast/trhs-random-chat-with-lovari/id1539578136?i=1000641962062
https://getoutmag.com/lovari-5/ 98.109.154.93 ( talk) 04:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun ( talk) 16:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I added filmography and television appearances of the subject that reflect current dates through May 2024. 170.212.0.95 ( talk) 19:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Categories

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

References

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
Note that 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 links to other discussions ( prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bands and musicians.
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

Moxiie

Moxiie (  | 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:MUSIC. All of her songs are self-published and appear to have received very little attention from reliable sources. Search results for her stage name are almost exclusively the songs themselves or her social media, and results for her legal name largely pertain to her career as a makeup artist. Majora4 ( talk) 23:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: The two archived MTV sources (both a small paragraph each) are about all there is. I can't find anything now, 10+ years later. I don't think the singer made any critical waves; no album reviews, no charted singles. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and New York. WCQuidditch 00:13, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Op:l Bastards

Op:l Bastards (  | 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. Non-notable band. SL93 ( talk) 21:28, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Rylo Huncho

Rylo Huncho (  | 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)

Coverage only concerns his suicide. See WP:BLP1E. TolWol ( talk) 04:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Supersci

Supersci (  | 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 by an IP user: Non-notable group, going by available sources. Both with its current ("Supersci") and its former ("Superscientifiku") name, the group is mentioned on some Swedish websites, but with very few exceptions (e.g. Sundsvalls Tidning) either these sources are non-reliable, or the subject is mentioned only in passing. GrabUp - Talk 18:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Gasper Crasto

Gasper Crasto (  | 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 am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG. Apart from a lot of trivial mentions, I found a few promotional pieces about his book ( 1, 2, 3), all of which let us know that the book "is available on Flipkart, and on Amazon for a price of Rs 650 in India, €14.23 in UK, and $14.90 in USA." JTtheOG ( talk) 17:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Najma Akhtar

Najma Akhtar (  | 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 subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC Dowrylauds ( talk) 13:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Salman Muqtadir

Salman Muqtadir (  | 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)

Sources are trivial (included in a list of other youtubers) and non-independent. One significant coverage is about his investigation by the police. No other significant independent secondary source covering his popularity as a content creator. - AlbeitPK ( talk) 01:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Migue García (musician)

Migue García (musician) (  | 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)

Biography of a musician that does not clear WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NMUSIC. While several sources refer to Migue Garcia, they all cover him in a WP:TRIVIAL manner connected to his father Charly Garcia, from whom notability cannot be WP:INHERITED. Other available sources found in BEFORE search are user-generated or primary. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 17:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Mr. SOS

Mr. SOS (  | 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)

Seems to fail WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. Enahnced some, but recreation of previously deleted subject. Mikeblas ( talk) 19:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Terrell Hines

Terrell Hines (  | 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)

Doesn't meet WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:SIGCOV. In the article, sources are greatly lacking, and the ones seems unreliable. Applicable to WP:INTERVIEW. Maybe per WP:ATD, It do be redirected to List of American musicians. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 20:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Rick Burke (musician)

Rick Burke (musician) (  | 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)

(PROD declined with no explanation) Fails WP:MUSICBIO. What little coverage I can find featuring this person's name is about his bands, not Burke himself Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This page we should keep given that the musician written about has a long-term and ongoing authentic discography as cited on reliable archival / data sites such as Discogs with news features on various media outlets. If for some reason it is a problem for the information to be listed under “Rick Burke (musician)”, I would strongly recommend that rather than deleting the article on superfluous grounds, the content should be split into 2 pages: one for “Comacozer” and one for “Tropical Sludge” with a redirect from the original “Rick Burke (musician)” page. In saying that, it does not make sense to split the information into several pages therefore it should be retained as one to keep the information tidy on Wikipedia. NEXUS6N6MAA10816 ( talk) 06:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

San Jose Taiko

San Jose Taiko (  | 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)

While previously deleted for G11, this time the page has been written in a more encyclopedic tone. Unfortunately, there is just not any coverage that I can find. BrigadierG ( talk) 20:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References to published academic work demonstrating the significance of this organization to the art of taiko in North America have been added, as well as national recognition from the NEA for the original managing director and artistic director of the organization. 31N2024 ( talk) 00:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Ecko Miles

Ecko Miles (  | 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 do not see enough evidence to establish WP:NMUSICIAN. Some sources are unreliably having a close connection to the subject, some are WP:ROUTINE coverages announcing founding of Daed Empire, most are PRs, announcing collabo or music release, etc. Fails WP:GNG in a nutshell. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

keep the subject meets some of the criterias of WP:NMUSICIAN for example the song he had with popular Nigerian rapper and musician charted major charts in the country as was cited in the article , also I would say it meets WP:GNG the sources used in the subject article are in line with WP:NGRS too, after thorough investigations I will say this the subject was not as notable as he was before the collaboration he had with Zlatan and odumodu blvck but that collaboration was what increased his notability and brought him further into the limelight. ProWikignome ( talk) 21:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Bongofari

Bongofari (  | 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)

Apart from lacking sources to reliable sources, the article doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 16:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Gemma Khalid

Gemma Khalid (  | 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)

Significance for WP:BIO is not visible.-- Анатолий Росдашин ( talk) 03:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Danila Kashin

Danila Kashin (  | 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)

Per WP:SINGLEEVENT. The remaining sources are news articles. Skepsiz ( talk) 18:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

List of best-selling music artists

List of best-selling music artists (  | 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)

It is not possible for anyone to record how many records of a particular artist have been sold nationally or internationally. Now even if we were to mention only what WP:RSs have said, then this list would be among those articles that fail that requirement the most.

This list is nothing but a WP:LISTCRUFT. This list has been probematic to core. Various RfC have been carried out but there has been no solution for this list. [8] [9]

As noted by the reliable sources, Elvis Presley, The Beatles are widely regarded to have sold more than 1 billion records, [10] [11] while Michael Jackson has sold over 750 million records. [12] However, this page is evidently misrepresenting their figures.

This list does not make mention of Bing Crosby who is known to have sold over 900 million records. [13] Could it be because Crosby does not have enough fans who are eager to impose their POV on this page? That appears to be biggest factor behind the names (at least the top ones) found on this list.

Not just that, but this list does not even list any artists from the most populated countries like India and China where some artists have clearly sold more than 200 million records such as A. R. Rahman, [14] Wei Wei [15] and more.

It would make more sense to have this list deleted instead of wasting any more time on it. Ratnahastin ( talk) 16:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Lists of people. WCQuidditch 17:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Keep: Hundreds of Wikipedia articles mention total sales figures of music artists and bands, so it can be asserted that the existence itself of this List is more than coherent. Apart from that, it contains very valuable information for the reader, such as the total amount of certified sales of each artist/band, with numerical (ergo, objective) data from multiple music certification systems of different countries/markets.
    The claimed sales figures, even if they are estimates, are supported by RS from news organizations (as stipulated in the List's guidelines). It is true that there are sources that claim the figure of 1 billion records for The Beatles [16], Jackson [17] and Presley [18], but there has been a consensus for years not to include such high figures as they were considered inflated.
    In those two RfCs mentioned above, the total deletion of the List was never considered, but rather had the objective of improving it, especially the last one, which modified the methodology previously used in the List, removing its percentage-based fabricated requirements (which were defended by the user Harout72, who incurred in WP:OWNERSHIP and decided to cease his activity on Wikipedia when he saw that the methodology he defended was going to be changed). These changes, results of a voting, make it now possible to include artists like A. R. Rahman or Wei Wei. It is true that perhaps it should have been done earlier, but there is certainly a consensus to do so. Indeed, you can see on the List's Talk page that we have been discussing the inclusion of these artists this week.
    Salvabl ( talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    You are correct
    Apple Corps, the record company that owns the Beatles stated the group had sold 600 million records which predated this article as they were listed at 1 billion at the time.
    "Apple Corps Ltd. was founded by The Beatles in 1968 to look after the group’s own affairs. The London-based company has administered the catalogue of The Beatles releases of the 1960s that have sold to date more than 600 million records, tape sand CDs." [19] [20] [21]
    For Elvis Presley, his record company Universal Music Group states that he has sold 500 million records to date "Widely acclaimed as the best-selling solo music artist of all time, Presley has sold more than 500 million records and holds the distinction for most songs charting on Billboard's Top 40 with 114 hits". [22] [23]
    For Michael Jackson, Sony Music Group stated he had sold 750 million records around the time the Beatles were claimed to have sold 600 million records [24] [25]
    This page as such is largely accurate barring a few outdated references. Never17 ( talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Keep: there's literally no reason to delete this article. We already reached a consensus from various editors to improve the page. Also Elvis Presley is claimed to have sold 500 million records Reuters (2022) - 500 Million , along with The Beatles NME (2024) - 500 Million and Michael Jackson Yahoo (2024) - 500 Million. This article is also far more reliable than the list of best selling authors page and generally one of the most well put together on the website and has been cited by Guinness World Records and various other media outlets
    Never17 ( talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Keep - an article not yet being "good enough" is not alone reason to delete it. Jonathan Deamer ( talk) 22:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Keep - As per above, the article just needs better sourcing and the topic has many reputable sources on it already. Sharrdx ( talk) 02:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Oh yes, the credibility factor is of utmost importance. It is as you stated problematic. If readers dispute the validity of this list in any format, then we have a problem, for we have no credibility. You mentioned Bing Crosby? Since 1926 and beyond, it is believed that yes, as you stated, that he may have reached that astronomical figure of what 900 million? and yet, where is he on the list? Where is Nana Mouskouri? Who sings in multiple languages and most importantly, according to an extensive number of sources she has sold over 350 million albums worldwide, and globally speaking, she is considered the best-selling female artist of all time. She is also nowhere to be found on this list. Moreover, other entertainers who I have mentioned in the past who are nonexistent in this list/article are Rocio Dúrcal, Rocio Jurado, Charles Aznavour, Roberto Carlos among the notables, who are not accorded in unit sales and are erroneously missing. All these artists have sold millions of units internationally. Also, for improvement purposes are some of the record claims, which are also dubious. Most notably, Julio Iglesias who in just about all websites and reputed reliable global sources establish him in the echelons of 300 million records sold globally and not the 150 million claimed by the Wikipedia article. I could go on and on with example after example stating without reservation that yes, we perhaps have a credibility problem. However, we can make adjustments and improve these omissions.
Case in point: there are other entertainers' who are also European descent and should never be omitted from this list or any list, such as the legendary Spanish singers (Raphael and Camilo Sesto), but for reasons unbeknownst to many, there are not. Furthermore, add to this credibility problem the Elvis Presley and Beatles factor; Without question and with respect to those who state that their sales are inflated, they are just too many sources being indicative that these two acts have easily surpassed the billion mark in sales. So, with all these examples that are obviously flawed, do I think that this Wikipedia list/article should be eradicated or faced deletion? No!! No!! No!! we must work to improve it. We have knowledgeable contributors previously mentioned who can make the proper adjustments and corrections to this list/article so it can be the very best it can be, to the perfected core. I for one, believe in the collaborations and countless contributions of these very capable writers/editors and users who I have previously mentioned in the past. In closing, I share the sentiments of these users and contributors who want to keep it. Let us not delete this article for not being good enough but improve on it so it could be more than just good enough. It could be the envy of all other website articles, due to its authenticity and factuality. Let's make it work!! Victor0327 ( talk) 03:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Absolutely a listcruft and is used for POV pushing. I don't see a List of best selling authors. Orientls ( talk) 06:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    List of best-selling fiction authors 170.203.201.93 ( talk) 14:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    This page has numerous inflated and questionable inclusions like William Shakespeare selling 4 billion books (how can you even prove that?) Or Agatha Christie selling 2 billion books, completely unreliable.
    Now compare that to this, it's fairly easy to prove most of the numbers provided based on the individual claimed sales figures for each of their releases. Nothing is inflated Never17 ( talk) 16:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep for reasons already said above. Breaktheicees ( talk) 08:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Strong keep. Per all the reasons stated above by multiple users. — Tom (T2ME) 11:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Reliable sources give ample coverage of the bestselling musicians, this something notable they mention. You can use the talk page to discuss any editing that needs to be done if you believe someone should be added or information is outdated. Dream Focus 12:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - seems like all of the objections in the nomination statement can be overcome with editing. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 12:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I don't think there is doubt over the list that it is being used simply for promoting particular fans' POV. The main articles of these artists already have details on how many records they have sold. I don't see why this list is needed. desmay ( talk) 15:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Whether you believe its needed or not is irrelevant. WP:NOTNEEDED. And its not just fans, many people are simply curious, which is why in the past 90 days, it has had 543,364 pageviews. Dream Focus 16:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    The media quite literally uses this page all of the time when mentioning popular music acts, they will always quote Wikipedia's sales figures for the artist in question. It makes no sense to get rid of this page. There are minor issues with it, but it's absolutely useful and generally very well put together Never17 ( talk) 22:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I agree: We need a best-selling list so avid music lovers, musical pundits and historians can use this list/page as a form of reference registry. Moreover, Wikipedia has references on an uncountable number of historical figures and subjects of study, for educational purposes, as an example, the lives of enlightened thinkers "Voltaire" and "Isaac Newton"; It also catapults into the lives of musical revolutionaries such as Elvis, Michael Jackson and The Beatles. This page could be used as a further intellectual study delving into a subject matter which many people are obviously interested in. The editors and contributors will make the right adjustments to make this list a factual coherent and cohesive one. Furthermore, and to alleviate the tensions among some contributors, POV pushing in pursuing an agenda based on fandom to any particular artist will be eradicated. We cannot promote "particular fans" POV as contributor desmay has stated. This shall not be an Elvis, Michael Jackson or Beatle fan page; but a truthful, unbiased, and impartial directory based on fact and intertwined with reputable reliable sources. As previously stated, the hard-working contributors and editor/writers for this best-selling list/article will make it work. Victor0327 ( talk) 02:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Anybody who is saying that this fancruft can be improved with writing is simply not addressing the fact that this article has been impossible to fix because of its use as a fancruft. Wikipedia is not for that purpose. Georgethedragonslayer ( talk) 04:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Most are in favor of keeping this article, we've had past attempts at trying to delete the article from fans who were upset about it and it's always been overruled. Never17 ( talk) 17:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: As per reasons stated above. Mazewaxie ( talkcontribs) 14:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Zaira Meneses

Zaira Meneses (  | 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 does not meet the notability guidelines outlined in WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It was accepted through AfC by an inexperienced user. The reference to The New York Times is merely a passing mention and is behind a paywall. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, and Mexico. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - I have added in citations and removed statements where I could not find reliable sources. I think the best coverage of her work is here. [1] [2] [3] As noted above, the New York Times article also includes a few sentences on her performance in New York; I think that this is an acceptable citation even if it is behind a paywall or available at ProQuest. DaffodilOcean ( talk) 11:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    My mention of the paywall was merely for informational purposes and not to express any opposition to the source. Whether behind a paywall or freely accessible, a good reference is always valuable. Hitro talk 11:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References

  1. ^ Shaw, Punch (2008-05-24). "Guitarists' concert is well worth the wait". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. pp. A16. Retrieved 2024-05-17.
  2. ^ Siegel, Steve (2013-10-06). "Music is family affair for guitarist Eliot Fisk". The Morning Call. pp.  [1], [2]. Retrieved 2024-05-17.
  3. ^ Small, Mark (2021). "An Afro-Cuban Legacy". Acoustic Guitar ; San Anselmo. No. 331. pp. 30–33 – via Proquest.

Brian Plummer (musician)

Brian Plummer (musician) (  | 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 musician, not reliably sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. The only properly verifiable claim of notability here is that he existed -- it asserts that he had hit singles, but fails to provide any verification of where they were "hits" (spoiler alert, not in RPM). And for "referencing", it just contextlessly bulletpoints a list of mostly primary source websites that aren't support for notability, without footnoting anything in the article body to any of them.
On a WP:BEFORE search, further, I didn't find enough coverage to salvage this -- apart from one concert review in The Globe and Mail on the occasion of him playing the El Mocambo in 1980, I otherwise only get local coverage in Saskatoon, glancing namechecks of his existence in sources that aren't about him in any sense, and tangential hits for other unrelated Brian Plummers (such as Bill Pullman's character in The Equalizer).
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have more and better sourcing than he has. Bearcat ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Bearcat ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: it looks very much as though this was written as a WP:NOTMEMORIAL... the only other edit the article creator has made to Wikipedia is to add some information about Jack Hazebroek to the article about the Rolling Stones Mobile Studio, and Hazebroek's name also appears in this article, so I imagine it was written as a tribute to Mr. Plummer, having worked with him. Richard3120 ( talk) 20:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Feli Ferraro

Feli Ferraro (  | 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 WP:GNG, coverage is limited to passing mentions and professional profiles in non-independent sources. The listed song credits are misleading, as she is not the primary recording artist of any of them; professional songwriters do not typically receive the same level of coverage for their work, and should not be presumed notable on the basis of having collaborated on notable works in the absence of actual RS coverage about their influence on the work. Searching online did not turn up any coverage better than what is already cited. signed, Rosguill talk 16:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Richard Raymond (pianist)

Richard Raymond (pianist) (  | 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)

Nothing on this guy but articles about a student of his, fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 18:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep Article was unsourced, and still requires some cleanup and improvement, however the subject is notable under GNG and WP:NMUSIC, particularly criteria 1 and 9. I added a few sources found quickly from a google search. A deeper search may reveal more. Bgv. ( talk) 23:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
A competition is only "major" enough to fulfill NMUSIC #9 if it gets WP:GNG-worthy media coverage that reports its winners as news, and is not "major" enough to pass that criterion if you have to rely on its own self-published press releases because third-party coverage treating it as newsworthy is non-existent. So he hasn't been shown to pass #9 at all, and with only one real media source about him he has not yet been shown to pass #1 either. Bearcat ( talk) 15:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I'm glad to see one article that may satisfy the WP:GNG criterion, however, we'd need more sustained coverage in order for it to actually pass WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous ( talk) 16:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
With respect to the concern of competitions not being major, I only now noticed that the citation in the article is to the subject's self-published website, however the wins have been confirmed by other sources (e.g. [26], [27]). I'll digress that the competitions cited are not "major" enough to have their winners make the mainstream news, however the status of winning of (specifically) the Stepping Stone Competition has been cited by mainstream news sources in their determination of endorsements for young musicians (e.g. [28], [29], and less significant coverage [30]). Focusing more heavily on NMUSIC #1 and the GNG, please see 1 and 2 above, along with this news article, and this inclusion of his biography backing the claims of notability from the Quebec Contemporary Music Society. For what it's worth, his discography was aired on the radio, as demonstrated here, and here. I will plug a few of these into the article, hopefully by the time anyone is reading this. Bgv. ( talk) 01:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Jon Forshee

Jon Forshee (  | 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)

Bio of a composer/academic fails GNG, NBIO, NACADEMIC, NMUSIC. The independent sources do not show WP:SIGCOV; WP:BEFORE search turns up no other reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage or evidence of notability under any of the other SNG guidelines that might apply. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 23:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, France, California, Colorado, Michigan, New York, and Ohio. WCQuidditch 00:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete -- composer/researcher doing good things to advance his career that are pretty typical for composers at this stage. Significantly TOOSOON at this point. On the non-academic side, lacking the awards or major ensembles (those not dedicated to producing student work) to pass notability; on the WP:PROF side, does not have academic appointments or the sort of extensive influence to pass there. (Some of the journals are important in the field, but book/CD reviews are not articles.) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    These are mostly fair points. Not sure what the "TOOSOON" means--too soon to have a wiki article? Regarding academic appointment, a Google search shows that Forshee was a visiting professor and now instructor. As to the ensembles performing Forshee's compositions, the Callithumpian Consort and Trio Kobayashi are, according to their own websites, not dedicated to performing student works (they list Elliott Carter, Schuittke, Huber, Scelsi, Cage, Lachenmann, Richard Barrett, Jürg Frey, Larry Polansky, James Tenney, basically all widely known composers on the international scene). The articles by Forshee don't appear to be book reviews or CD reviews, but neither do they appear to be rigorous scholarly research articles; they seem to be somewhere in between: interpretive analytical essays? The one in Computer Music Journal is an early review of software by the pioneering computer music composer Trevor Wishart. Part of the motivation for this article is that Forshee is one of the few notable (or borderline notable) students of composer Anthony Davis, who just had his Met Opera premiere of his Malcolm X this season. Dolemites ( talk) 18:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Notability cannot WP:INHERITED from Anthony Davis or anyone else; for each subject it must be established independently according to the criteria. No articles by Forshee can be used establish his notability, only what independent and reliable sources have to say about him with "significant coverage." Dclemens1971 ( talk) 03:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 03:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Reign in Slumber

Reign in Slumber (  | 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. The main notability claim being attempted here is that one of its members was previously associated with a different band, which is not "inherently" notable without WP:GNG-worthy sourcing -- but seven of the 16 footnotes here (close to half) are the band's own self-published content about itself on their own website or Bandcamp, which is not notability-supporting sourcing as it isn't independent of them, and the other nine aren't coverage about this band, but either glancingly mention this band in the process of being about something else, or are completely tangential sourcing about people associated with this band doing other unrelated things that have nothing to do with this band, none of which helps to support this band's notability either.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have much, much better sourcing than this. Bearcat ( talk) 20:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Reign in Slumber, is truly metal music band in Cambodia. this sub genre in it's very very rare find better sourced than this to support with their action. Without fund and most people came there just looking for free music during the music in Cambodia just built-up. Ten years they're struggle to survive, without them this sub genre will disappear in Cambodia. Please consider to accept my reason. Thanks JammyKH ( talk) 21:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
If having a wikipedia article helps them survive, that's PROMO and not helping us keep the article. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia does not exist as a public relations platform to help emerging bands build their careers — making it big comes first and then the Wikipedia article comes second, not vice versa. Bearcat ( talk) 13:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I just improved some info and add more better sourced. Thanks JammyKH ( talk) 22:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Source 22 is the only one that's in what Source Tool identifies as a RS, but it's a very trivial mention. This is about the band [31], trivial coverage and I'm unsure if it's even a RS. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: In cambodia, for a small subgenre music not getting any interest at all, Only POP, Hip-hop, Romantic and Khmer Traditional that's people acceptable. Metal in Cambodia is about to die. Reign in Slumber is real, they exist, they have the real music, real album and real performance. [32] [33] Camboculture27 ( talk) 03:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The notability test doesn't hinge on whether or not they're real, it hinges on whether or not they have received third-party attention in reliable sources. Bearcat ( talk) 15:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
What proper reliable sourcing is making this "satisfactory"? Bearcat ( talk) 13:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep: They deserve to be kept here for retention purposes. JammyKH ( talk) 12:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia's inclusion criteria do not hinge on what they "deserve", Wikipedia's inclusion criteria hinge on WP:GNG-worthy reliable sourcing, of which you still haven't shown any. Bearcat ( talk) 13:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • CU note The three keep !votes above were all written by the same person using three different accounts. I've struck through two of them, and blocked all three accounts. Girth Summit (blether) 16:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Magdalena Hinterdobler

Magdalena Hinterdobler (  | 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 soprano has not received significant coverage in independent sources, bar this one article.

Citations 2, 3, and 7 are from institutions with which Hinterdobler has been associated. The rest provide insignificant coverage, often not more than a half-sentence.

As there is only one source which is both independent and provides significant coverage, the relevant notability criteria ( WP:BASIC/ WP:MUSICBIO) are not met. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:35, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete. I spent about an hour trying to find WP:SIGCOV prior to this being taken to AFD. You can see my comments on the nominator's talk page as we discussed this before taking it to AFD. I looked at over two dozen critical reviews, and while there are many reviews of the operas she has been in, she is only mentioned in passing or not at all in those reviews. Likewise on reviews of her recordings. The most we get is a single sentence (two at most; and those are rare) with a general critique of her performance. For example, The Guardian review only mentions her name in the title list of leading singers but never actually talks about her contribution to the recording. This is not in-depth. The only in-depth independent source is the first source cited, Opern News magazine article. If a couple more sources of this latter kind are found that would prove WP:MUSICBIO and WP:SIGCOV are met. Please ping me if sources with in-depth independent coverage are located and I will gladly change my vote to keep. 4meter4 ( talk) 00:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per WP:SINGER #6 "having performed two lead roles at major opera houses." -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 02:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes there is that SNG, but I honestly think that we need to deprecate that in the same way that the RFC on WP:NSPORTS deprecated many of its similar SNG language. We really shouldn't be building articles on singers that can't meet WP:SIGCOV for verifiability reasons; particularly on BLPS per Wikipedia:BLPSOURCES. 4meter4 ( talk) 04:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Your opinion that that SNG should be deprecated does not mean that that SNG no longer applies. What is not verifiable about this article? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 19:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I never said that SNGs don't apply. SNGs by their nature often contradict other policies, which is why they are often contentious at AFD. It’s perfectly fine to make a claim to notability using an SNG. It’s also equally fine to criticize the SNG for being a bad policy because it doesn’t align with other policy language elsewhere. There have been many RFCs over SNG language, and several of them have led to policy changes that have→ deprecated certain SNGs within the the last five years. I think it’s reasonable to point to those RFCs as an example of how in certain content areas we have moved towards requiring more in-depth coverage. The need to re-examine our policies only gets established if people start raising that issue in discussions at AFDs. That’s what happened in the NSPORTS case prior to the NSPORTS RFC. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 20:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes, you are allowed to criticize SNGs, but your opinions of the SNGs are not valid reasons to delete an article passing it; neither is the fact that other SNGs being deprecated sufficient reason for overriding this currently standing and completely valid SNG to delete this well-done article. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 23:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
BeanieFan11 Not true. Per WP:SNG "Articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found, or if the topic is not suitable for an encyclopedia." Those calling for deletion are making a valid argument that this particular article lacks adequate sourcing. The main issue of contention here is whether a bunch of low level not in-depth coverage constitutes "adequate sourcing". Those of us voting delete are specifically making the argument that it does not constitute adequate sourcing, which is a valid reason to override an SNG per SNG policy. 4meter4 ( talk) 23:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
May be, not required to be. The guideline was never intended to get rid of well-done articles like this. In what way is Wikipedia benefited by deleting here? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 23:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
In my view, this is likely a case of WP:TOOSOON where the subject is likely to prove notability in the future, and we have simply jumped the gun and created an article before the independent sources have come into existence that contain in-depth coverage. I think it's best practice to wait to write articles on BLPs when we have a minimum of two in-depth sources for a variety of reasons; many of them articulated at WP:NOT, WP:VERIFIABILITY, WP:BLP, and WP:OR. One of the major issues in this article is that the majority of the biographical content is cited to PR materials written by talent management and PR firms for theaters, opera houses, etc. It's not best practice to build articles on BLPs from materials of this kind. We do the encyclopedia a disservice when we don't uphold quality standards that emphasize building biographical content within biography pages from independent materials. Not doing so, allows wikipedia to become a tool of promotion for talent management and PR firms, which ultimately creates a conflict of interest between wikipedia's goal of building an encyclopedia, and the potential to use wikipedia for other motives. One of our best means of quality control in terms of both verifiability and maintaining NPOV is making sure we build articles from independent sources with in-depth coverage. That's why we have WP:GNG. Best. 4meter4 ( talk) 00:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
As far as I can tell, only six of the 21 references in the article are from Hinterdobler's opera houses? What parts of the article are not verifiable or original research? BeanieFan11 ( talk) 15:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes and they also are the most used sources, which verify over half of the article including almost all of the biographical information. The other sources only verify specific roles in specific opera performances. Asserting "only six" doesn't actually look at what information and how much of that information is coming from those non-independent marketing materials. If you can't see the ethical problem here for using marketing tools to verify a BLP article I don't know what to say further. We have two very different ideas about the ethics of editing and sourcing articles on BLPs. 4meter4 ( talk) 15:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
There are also briefer mentions that are not mere listings of who sang which role: "eine resolute, selbstbewusste Eva" (a resolute, self-confident Eva); "auch die 'kleinen' Walküren ... Magdalena Hinterdobler, die auch die Gutrune sang, ... sangen ansprechend" (the 'lesser' valkyries too, ... Magdalena Hinterdobler, who also sang Gutrune, ... were equal to their roles)—this compressed Ring is also not in the article. I suspect there are similar short reviews of her performances in other magazines and newspapers, and the article isn't reflecting that coverage because of a desire to focus on her leading roles, use English-language sources where possible, and / or avoid negative coverage. From the point of view of notability, however, I believe that mass of small stuff about her, together with at least one extended biographical article (I don't see the Frankfurter Allgemeine cited anywhere; has anyone searched there for coverage of her joining the company?), puts her over the top. Yngvadottir ( talk) 02:55, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Lightburst can you please identify more than one source with "significant coverage" to meet WP:BASIC. The whole point of the nominator is that there is only one (not multiple sources) with significant independent coverage. Both Yngvadottir and myself have confirmed this is the case which is why I voted delete. Yngvadottir was able to locate several reviews mentioning the subject in one or two sentences but specifically stated they didn't contain significant coverage. Asserting that BASIC is met is just not true with the current sources in evidence. You are the only commenter here asserting BASIC is met, and you have provided no evidence to substantiate that argument. Basic states, "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published[4] secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[5] and independent of the subject.[6] Please produce a second source with significant coverage. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The next section after BASIC reads People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. and A person who does not meet these additional criteria may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notability. You do not need coverage to prove notability, you can meet a subject specific guideline instead. Dream Focus 16:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes. You don't need to repeat yourself Dream Focus. I am aware of the SNG guideline. That still doesn't change the fact that BASIC isn't met which is why you yourself made an argument based on criteria 6 of WP:SINGER. That's fine if that is the WP:CONSENUS opinion. I personally am of the opinion that criteria 6 of SINGER is a poor predictor of notability, runs afoul of WP:BLPSOURCES policy, and is so subjective in its meaning and interpretation that it isn't a well crafted policy. After this AFD closes, regardless of the outcome, I am considering creating an RFC along the lines of Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability which deprecated similar SNG language for athletes. In my opinion BASIC should be our guide. We need at least two sources with in-depth independent coverage to build an article on any BLP in my opinion to meet the spirit of our policy guidelines at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
My rationale stands and we disagree so please observe WP:COAL and I will do the same. Lightburst ( talk) 18:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Note to closer. Please consider the evidence and strength of the arguments in your close. I strongly urge you to ignore/overrule arguments made without supporting evidence. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The subject specific guidelines exist for a reason. Someone can be notable for their accomplishments, not just for media coverage of them. WP:SINGER #6 Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03s64z1 distinguished Austrian pianist Rudolf Buchbinder, in London for a rare appearance at the Royal Festival Hall, and the rising star conductor Lionel Bringuier. Pianist Mark Swartzentruber will perform live on the show, ahead of his concert at Kings Place tomorrow. So she is in an ensemble that contains a distinguished pianists, a conductor called a "rising star" in an opera review, and a guy with his own concerts and notable accomplishments. http://markswartzentruber.com/biography/ She was on an album that got a long review. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/feb/14/bruch-die-loreley-review-andrew-clements She is a member of the Frankfurt ensemble, a notable ensemble which she has performed at major opera houses with. https://oper-frankfurt.de/en/ensemble/ensemble/?detail=1256 So a singer can be notable for having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. She performed as Elisabetta in Verdi's Don Carlos Dream Focus 16:14, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Just added another RS and performance. Gamaliel ( talk) 19:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Although there is some LOW-level coverage, there is not enough SIGCOV. Performing with a notable ensemble doesn’t automatically provide notability in its own right to an individual. - SchroCat ( talk) 22:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Merge with Oper Frankfurt: Coverage seems to be too trivial to have an article about the individual, but they do seem notable in context of the opera company. Oaktree b ( talk) 00:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Oaktree b I would disagree with that assessment. There are hundreds (perhaps thousands) of more significant singers with biographical entries in music encyclopedias that have been resident performers at Oper Frankfurt during its nearly 250 year long history. If we were to look through the Großes Sängerlexikon for example or The Grove Book of Opera Singers I would imagine we could compile a list of more than a thousand singers who were at one time or another employed by Oper Frankfurt as a resident artist; and all of those would be encyclopedic by virtue of being in an encyclopedia. If we are going to start covering indiviudal singers in an opera company article it should be the most prominent ones. Hinterdobler is a rather minor figure from an institutional point of view, and currently the article doesn't talk about any of its artists from a historical framework. It would be WP:UNDUEWEIGHT. A company like Oper Frankfurt at any given time employs close to a hundred leading singers in a season ( Currently there are over 90 leading performers with the company between resident and guest artists) They have over 20 operas in their repertory for the 2024-2025 season between revivals of older production and their plans of more than a dozen new productions. Focusing on a single leading artist, particularly one with little coverage, seems inappropriate; particularly when many of their other artists would be high profile artists with lots of WP:SIGCOV. I note that many of the singers currently employed by them have articles, as well as lots of past performers. 4meter4 ( talk) 01:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. She has received positive critical comment in at least two recognized sources. Further searching in the German press would no doubt reveal more.-- Ipigott ( talk) 12:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Lean Keep (not familiar with opera, hence not a "solid" keep). Appears to meet the music SNG (which itself should be sufficient, otherwise such criteria are useless) and the nom admits there is already significant coverage. Not to mention the article looks pretty decent – and NBASIC also states that If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. BeanieFan11 ( talk) 19:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep I added a magazine review to the article. I think we have enough to show that the person is notable and I agree with BeanieFan11 regarding NBASIC. I came here from following the article at DYK. I was the editor who promoted the nomination DYK Bruxton ( talk) 20:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment: I am the first author, and I don't care if this article is deleted or not.
    • I was pleasantly busy over the weekend, - sorry for being late to this, and thank you all who added to the article!! (That sort of collaboration is Wikipedia as I like it.)
    • My first indicator of whether a singer is notable often is - as you will guess - my own first-hand personal opinion, for this one as for many others. I hope that everybody who has commented will have listened to her speaking and singing, Der Traumgörge. I saw her (only) in that opera, which was sort of a premiere because the conductor says it was the first unabridged rendering of Zemlinsky's music which had been due for performance (and rehearsed) in 1907, but was not given then for anti-semitic reasons, so had a late premiere in 1980. The only other of "my" singer articles suggested to be deleted was Johannes Hill (so I guess my opinion was right so far).
    • I didn't know WP:SINGER but thank Michael Bednarek for pointing that out. It supports my thought that our view on notability should perhaps rely more on what a person factually does (primary), than what others think about what she does (secondary). - For comparison: just imagine we'd require a contemporary review for Bach's cantatas, we'd have an article about one of the around 200 extant. They remained mostly unpublished and unnoticed for a century after he died. - What she does - two leading roles at a leading house - is objective, what others write about it is subjective, and whether we regard what they write as in-depth or not adds another layer of subjectivity.
    • In this particular case, I looked if sources supported my opinion that she is notable, and found enough to nominate for DYK, and obviously enough for the reviewer and for most of the readers that day. I simply had no time to look further for more facts and other sources, sorry about that but it happens with my focus on recent death articles and Bach's cantatas that turn 300 week after week (and real life, Bach cantatas in concert and the pleasant company that comes with it), so I again thank those who did that. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • ps: I went to church yesterday to one that was also up for deletion. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Responses:
      • @ Yngvadottir, thank you for retrieving sources. You asked for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: sorry, it was hidden under FAZ (Brachmann, Jan (27 February 2024). "Ein Lichtgedicht". FAZ (in German). Retrieved 5 March 2024.) Sorry, I thought FAZ is easier than all that German, and would say BBC, not British Broadcasting Corporation. The reviewer wrote about her singing in a half-sentence at the beginning "frisch, schön und so vorbildlich textverständlich" (fresh, beautiful and with such exemplary diction). I can add that to the article. As for the Mozart reviews, I never saw them, and Mozart seems to be past for her vocal development; her voice was possibly never ideally suited for singing Mozart. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC) - I added that review, and also the Chrysothemis review. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • @ 4meter4, I added the Clements review of Die Loreley. I am not surprised that the reviewer of a first recording of an opera by a famous composer deals more with the opera than the singers. The review proves, however, that the recording was noticed internationally. - I have no idea why you'd mark what opera houses say about her - typically just a factual list of roles - as "promotional". The Chemnitz bio had a quote from a review. I added the complete review now. But why would you believe the same quote in the Chemnitz bio was promotional? Again, this review (Spinola) of a world premiere deals more with the piece than the singers. It describes her lead role at length. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        @ Gerda Arendt I already wrote this to you in another discussion. I will copy paste it here: "All work products/publications by a performing arts organization are intended as a tool of promotion as well as a tool for information. Opera companies/theatres are businesses and they have an invested interest in promoting their company/theatre and its performers in order to sell tickets. There is a commercial aspect to the performing arts, and the materials that an opera company/theatre produces for public consumption are directly connected to its commercial interests. This is why we should avoid using sources produced by theatres/opera companies as much as possible. Artist bios are written by paid talent management and PR companies. Most professional singers have a paid agent who specializes in marketing opera singers, and those agents often write the bios hosted on theatre/opera company websites. Or the opera company/theatre itself will have an in house PR/marketing staff member responsible for writing those materials. There is therefore, a direct COI with these kinds of sources because they are written as a marketing tool for commercial gain. When possible, its best not to use PR materials of this type for ethical reasons." If an artist is notable, we shouldn't need to use these materials because the independent significant coverage should be there to source the article. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        I already responded in that other discussion and also copy paste here: "I don't know what you normally read, but I see that Oper Frankfurt and Hessisches Staatstheater write their own bios, and their own high-class program books. - German opera houses in general are public institutions, financed mostly by tax money."
        Adding: what in the following Frankfurt bio is promotional and not ethical to be used?
        "Magdalena Hinterdobler, who sang her first Evas in a new Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg at Oper Frankfurt last winter, joined the Ensemble in the 2023/24 season, during which she sang Grete in a new production of Zemlinsky’s Der Traumgörge / George the Dreamer and Elisabeth in Don Carlo, which is followed by Chrysothemis in the first revival of last season's new Elektra. Other highlights in 2022/23 included Agathe in Der Freischütz at Theater Chemnitz and Chrysothemis (role debut) in Elektra at Tirol’s Landestheater in Innsbruck. She trained at the University for Music and Theatre in Munich and Bavaria’s August Everding Theatre Academy with Andreas Schmidt, and in Helmut Deutsch’s Lieder classes. She was a member of the Ensemble at Oper Leipzig from 2014 - 2022, where her many roles included Rusalka, Micaëla in Carmen and Marie in The Bartered Bride. Word of her interpretation of Anna in the world premiere of Gerd Kühr’s Paradiese spread far and wide. While working in Leipzig with the Gewandhaus Orchester she also sang many Mozart and Italian roles, including Liù in Puccini’s Turandot and, most recently, Mimì in La Bohème. Her concert repertoire ranges from the baroque to contemporary music. She has appeared with many well known conductors and orchestras including Stuttgart’s Bach Collegium, the Munich Radio Orchestra, the Hamburg and Bamberg symphony orchestras, Dresden Philharmonic and the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchester. She also enjoys singing Lieder with the pianist Gerold Huber. A CD of early Wagner Lieder was released by CPO in 2013, the year she appeared with the Munich Radio Orchestra for the first time as Dorella in Wagner’s Das Liebesverbot / The Ban on Love, which was followed by roles in Wagner operas in Leipzig including Ortlinde and Gutrune in the Ring des Nibelungen under GMD Ulf Schirmer. She continues her journey into young dramatic roles this season with Agathe in Weber’s Der Freischütz at Theater Chemnitz and Chrysothemis in Elektra at the Landestheater in Tirol."
        Not all of this is even used, because I don't like lists of famous orchestras and conductors. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        Gerda I'm not going to get in a back and forth. Wikipedia's policies on COI, non-independent sources are well articulated on multiple policy pages. WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT behaviour isn't helpful. 4meter4 ( talk) 16:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        I am just trying to understand. Simple question: that Ring in Leipzig - the review says she sang "a minor valkyrie" and "Gutrune". The Leipzig Opera has the full list of the cast, and is - to my knowledge - the only source for the fact that she was "Ortlinde". The source is used only for that detail but you tagged it as promotional. Should we therefore omit that detail, loosing precision? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
      • @ Michael Bednarek, thank you for the reference for year and place of birth, dated 2008. I used it for more detail but it was marked promotional. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
        • 4meter4's objections, in this case, to material in a program booklet by a public broadcaster are in contradiction to WP:RS. If reliable sources collate an artist's performance data, Wikipedia editors are free, and indeed encouraged, to use that secondary source. That's a widely followed and uncontroversial principle. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 00:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. Information published by one's employer (the theatres at which she has performed) is most certainly not independent coverage. The theatre's website or publicatons can be cited to show that she actually performed a role there, but they should not be cited for the theatre's opinion of her performance, as they have a conflict of interest in that they want to promote themselves by promoting their performers. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 03:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Correct, but no opinion or assessment was cited from those sites in this case. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 06:39, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. I'm persuaded by the additional sources Yngvadottir located and analyzed as well as by the WP:NBASIC guidance that BeanieFan11 pointed out: multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. While there is the caveat that this coverage should not be trivial, I don't think it is in this case, based on the measure of trivial coverage provided in the notability guideline (the bare mention of Three Blind Mice), as the coverage identified through this review process examines and weighs the tropic's performance quality. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 22:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    If that measure is supposed to be an upper threshold for "trivial", as you imply, then the book-length coverage from the second example must be the lower threshold for "significant"... JoelleJay ( talk) 00:49, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't mean to imply the Three Blind Mice example is the upper threshold for trivial mentions (it's possible for coverage that is more than the Three Blind Mice example to still be trivial; a hypothetical In college, Binton Krill was in a band called Five Eye Lice. Five Eye Lice toured the West Coast in 1988.). I nevertheless think there's sufficient coverage that rises so above the Three Blind Mice example to the point that it's not trivial coverage. As for lower thresholds, I don't think there's consensus in the Wikipedia community for book-length coverage to be considered a lower threshold for significant coverage. With the exception of, say, multivolume biographies/histories, book-length coverage probably tends to be expected to be the upper threshold/expectation for significant coverage. Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits) 06:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I'm just not convinced that a couple sentences of praise here and there in reviews really contributes to BASIC, let alone constitutes SIGCOV. Such brief descriptions of performances are absolutely routine in theater reviews and offer no evidence the subject has received sustained secondary coverage. We should not be constructing biographies out of 80% non-independent sources and 20% disjoint quotes on isolated performances -- how can we capture BALASP if separate pieces of information have not been independently contextualized with each other? JoelleJay ( talk) 00:38, 15 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Right now this looks like No consensus as editors are very divided about whether or not notability is established by the existing sources. I notice that a great deal of new content and new sourcs have been added since this article's nomination; a source review of this new content would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Yuno Miles

Yuno Miles (  | 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)

as much as i love yuno, the only reliable source that talks about him is this, which makes him not notable Authenyo ( talk) 00:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply

i typed this crying knowing that big wikipedia will delete yuno miles Authenyo ( talk) 00:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
He is notable in my opinion; while I am not a fan of his music he does have almost 1 million followers on spotify and has been drawn even further into the public eye by his Drake diss. OJSimpsonLover ( talk) 03:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I don't think that this page should be entirely erased. It has a good structure, some notability, and there's other pages that should probably be deleted. I vote no for this page deletion. Also why did that OJSimpsonLover fella get blocked??? It says for vandalism but he was just giving his opinion. TheEpicApartmentLord ( talk) 16:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
(insert reminder of WP:NOTAVOTE and to actually provide links or a reference to someone else's comment here instead of just saying "some notability")
OJSimpsonLover was blocked for vandalizing articles. That said, @ Air on White, I'm not sure that means why their comment should be discarded. Only sockpuppets have a strike-comments policy. Or was there something I've missed? Aaron Liu ( talk) 19:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I've removed the striking of the comment. Liz Read! Talk! 01:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
OJSimpsonLover was blocked for vandalism and his inappropriate username. However, he was not just a blatant vandal, but also a subtler troll: some of his comments appear to be in good faith and were aimed at confusing other users and administrators, making his block less likely. I also believe he was a sockpuppet for his demonstrated familiarity with the customs and policies of Wikipedia and his technical proficiency in areas such as wikitext and referencing. I therefore believe it was reasonable for me to assume that his comment was intended to disrupt the Wikipedia project and should have been struck through. Air on White ( talk) 04:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
They have not made any comments that I find questionable and do not seem to be familiar with Wikipedia at all. Aaron Liu ( talk) 22:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
This isn't the place to discuss vandalism or sockpuppetry, so I'll end this discussion here. But I'm willing to continue this discussion (at another page) if anyone is interested, particularly if someone is making an SPI case. Air on White ( talk) 01:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC) edited Air on White ( talk) 01:52, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/music/news-who-yuno-miles-fans-react-youtuber-releases-hilarious-drake-diss-response-metro-boomin-s-challenge Yes No WP:RSP: user-generated Yes No
https://www.rapreviews.com/2023/11/yuno-miles-yuno-i-cant-rap/ Yes Yes Yes Yes
https://www.sescoops.com/wwe/rapper-yuno-miles-releases-wwe-diss-track-im-beefing-with-the-wwe Yes Yes Probably, website has multiple writers and this one has a degree Yes Yes
https://pitchfork.com/features/article/the-age-of-shitpost-modernism/ Yes Yes No One example with only one mention No
https://gizmodo.com/saga-bbl-drizzy-drake-kendrick-lamar-metro-boomin-1851470820 Yes Yes No Only one mention as "The Meme Diss Track"; in the article's slides. 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}}.
  • Here's a table. I don't think two is enough, is it? Aaron Liu ( talk) 11:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I believe most editors would consider two enough. Air on White ( talk) 20:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC) reply
SE Scoops is two videos and two quotes of his, with about 5 lines of text otherwise, might be a RS but that's hardly extensive coverage. Maybe 1/2 a source, being generous. I'd still like to see more than these two sources, neither of which is extensive. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply
What do you mean? The entire article is about a diss track he released.
I do agree that two sources is a bit far from keeping, though. Aaron Liu ( talk) 00:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Now that pythoncoder has provided a video reference with The Tonight Show, I think that tips the scales towards a weak keep. Aaron Liu ( talk) 19:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep - he appears in two articles that count towards GNG, but there isn't enough notable articles at the moment for a stronger keep. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 04:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Speedy delete - 𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘦𝘭'𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘮𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘺, 07:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Uh, speedy per what? Aaron Liu ( talk) 11:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    AskeeaeWiki, is this even a vote? Per what? dxneo ( talk) 13:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Seems like he passes GNG based on the sources so far. Other stuff that may or may not count, some from the draft version:
    From WP:THENEEDLEDROP:
    ... per Wikipedia policy regarding self-published sources, these reviews should never be used as third-party sources about living people.
    Granted, what you linked isn't a review, it's an interview. But given the discussion is about what third-party sources could be used to justify keeping an article about Yuno Miles, I think this still fairly doesn't fit. It also doesn't help that Fantano isn't a journalist, let alone the fact that using YouTube links (of which this article currently uses two, both linking to Yuno Miles' own songs) is already considered generally unreliable per WP:RSPYT. Cadenrock1 ( talk) 03:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think this discussion needs more time so I'm relisting it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete coverage seems weak, fails WP:NMUSIC.- KH-1 ( talk) 02:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • weak keep, I personally think Miles is a notable but unreported figure, having a large following but lacking news coverage. This means has and will continue to have his page created many times before being locked. ( Discuss Roastedbeanz1 contribs) 17:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Roastedbeanz1, why is your signature bearing @ Not0nshoree. Also, I didn't get your argument here. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Yuno Miles is very much notable. I know there's a stigma against making pages for every insignificant "soundcloud rapper", but rest assured, Yuno Miles is not one of them. ☞ Rim < Talk | Edits > 18:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    I agree with keeping Yuno Miles on Wikipedia. He is already a popular rapper no matter if its meme rap such as "4 Wheeler" or the "BBL Drizzy Freestyle." I think it way to late to make that happen. Diamondpro114 ( talk) 23:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Show evidence using sources that meets WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I can't believe I have to say this but Wikipedia doesn't care that you personally think this article subject is notable. Our subjective judgments are irrelevant to AFD decisions. The question is, are there sufficient reliable sources to establish notability? Are the sources located by User:pythoncoder and any other editors adequate to demonstrate GNG? That's the important question here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: This article doesn't meet GNG, source analysis lacks WP:SIGCOV and intentionally, I don't succumbed with the rationales of being "a fan of a certain musician." Per the state of the article, I was checking redirect to see if the "Hood Rejects" do exist but not. At this point, when sources of an article is not enough to establish notability, it becomes deletion or redirecting. However, there is no room for redirecting and mostly, delete. I have critically accessed the sources presently in the article and some doesn't relate to WP:RS. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 01:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ SafariScribe Could you explain how the two sources I've assessed and the OnesToWatch source from pythoncoder don't meet GNG? Aaron Liu ( talk) 03:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Aaron Liu, two sources aren't enough for me to justify whether an article is notable. There isn't any significant coverage of this individual as a musician whatsoever. Also remember that "celebrities" may be famous but not notable. One may have millions of followers, yet neither has he/her been covered in multiple news source. Per my experience so far, they are usually appearing in interviews, some which are not reliable or secondary per WP:RS. While being regarding !voting is not deletion, I am talking about the pure simple fact here and that the truth of the matter. Should I analyse the arguments too to see the argument coming from keep if not most, "he is notable, I have heard the song", "he is famous, I am a fan", etc. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    In analysis, for example, no weight will be given to "He is notable in my opinion; while I am not a fan of his music he does have almost 1 million followers on spotify and has been drawn even further into the public eye by his Drake diss." Notability is not ones opinion. If that, then, my father is notable in my mind. The second was I don't think that this page should be entirely erased. It has a good structure, some notability, and there's other pages that should probably be deleted. I vote no for this page deletion. Also why did that OJSimpsonLover fella get blocked??? It says for vandalism but he was just giving his opinion. Here, we don't believe in WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST. If the editor thinks the other articles like that merits deletion, so be it, nominate it or leave it. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Oaktree b and Not0nshoree argued the article lacking sources and not meeting GNG.
    Then the source analysis table generated also good. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep Yuno Miles' music is unique. Also his song was trending on YouTube and hit music charts. Also he will hit 1m subs soon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedun ( talkcontribs)

User:Freedun, I want to know how you know about anything called AFD when you literally joined some minutes ago. What was your previous account? Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
what is AFD? I dont think i had an account from the past but i edited my schools wikipedia page in the past so maybe i did but im not sure Freedun ( talk) 04:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Freedun, that is my point. What is the school and your former name. It might help us know how to analyse your argument as it may lay on "a new user". Tell me the account and why you left after writing your schools page. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
uh sorry dude I'm not comfortable telling you what high school i went to... Freedun ( talk) 05:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
It is unusual a new editor coming to !vote in an AFD. There is something going on. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 05:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
uh ok? Freedun ( talk) 06:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
actually imma say weak keep like Roasted beanz Freedun ( talk) 06:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
http://www.onestowatch.com/en/blog/meet-yuno-miles-the-internets-favorite-rapper Yes Was about the rapper No Ones to watch is a music blog and by the virtue of looking at the written content, it made me feel to notify people of a notable blog it is. Another example Bella Naija. No Blog, equally advertorial. No
https://www.theneedledrop.com/interviews/2023/11/a-conversation-with-yuno-miles Yes An interview should always be independent as the person interviewed always say about him; those which aren't verifiable at most times. No Per WP:THENEEDLEDROP. No Its an interview per WP:INTERVIEW or related. No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrJWNQSIoNE No Clip of played music. The full show should have contained other stuffs. Yes The show is reliable and notable as well. No In the context, the music was played within any discussion of it's nature, etc. I could have taken it as a review but no! 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}}.

Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Graeme Blevins

Graeme Blevins (  | 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. While there are a number of sources, I couldn't find anything that is both reliable and provides WP:SIGCOV. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 04:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 04:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Thanks for flagging. Have improved the article with additional authoritative news sources. We are talking here about one of the very best saxophone players of his generation. In the Brit Awards 2024 (the leading awards in UK for music), RAYE won more awards than any other artist, so for Blevins to have a track named after him on her album is notable. He has been regularly in the bands of several household name stars and played in a Grammy award winning album. Wikiwikiwwwest ( talk) 00:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Still try to include more sources that contribute to the WP:GNG criteria. GMH Melbourne ( talk) 13:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Coverage in the article is now about the Raye group, which isn't helping this person's individual notability... Listed here [38], but it's always in a long list of other people. Playing on an album with a group of others doesn't meet notability here. Oaktree b ( talk) 13:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 05:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Alley of the Dolls (band)

Alley of the Dolls (band) (  | 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)

Newly created article, PROD declined. Sourcing does not establish WP:GNG being met. WP:BEFORE brings up only a couple of brief reviews of their EP. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 22:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Happy to add additional citations to the EP as many exist MusicForeverYours ( talk) 01:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Added citations to additional reviews, more are available but not always in English as the band has a lot of support in none English speaking countries so reviews are not in English as is requested by Wikipedia. MusicForeverYours ( talk) 15:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Source 18 is a RS for the album review; the rest used now in the article is primary or non-RS. I can only find the Spill Magazine review, so without any other sources, the band is not at notability. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Draftify: If more citations for this article exist, they should absolutely be added. it's free realist 9 16:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply
    Two additional reviews and citations added to establish bands obvious notability. More available but dont want the article to just be a list of magazine reviews. Happy to add more if this view isnt shared. MusicForeverYours ( talk) 15:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Aida Vee

Aida Vee (  | 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. little to no 3rd party articles detailing artist Minmarion ( talk) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 04:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Adi Oasis

Adi Oasis (  | 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 has been moved disruptively by the creator that has COI without improvements since last decline, so I am taking this to AfD. I cannot tell whether this passes notability, but as I can tell from the comments of the reviewers. Before search shows primarily stories on her releasing songs and albums, and sources listed are rather mostly interviews and videos. Toadette Edit! 15:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 23:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Lya Stern

Lya Stern (  | 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 is mainly a resume. Most of the sources in the article consist of dead links from websites that are related to Lya Stern; the rest of the sources either have brief mentions of her or don't mention her at all. After doing a Google search to see if there were sources that could be added to the article, the only significant coverage I found of her was from a website that listed Wikipedia as a source. The rest of the information I found was from her YouTube channel and mentions of her from her students. As a result, she doesn't met WP:GNG or WP:NBLP. That Tired Tarantula Burrow 20:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Just agreeing with That Tired Tarantula above -- @Atlantic306 you have linked to reviews for a different musician. If Lya Stern had an Allmusic staff bio, that would be relevant, but I could not find one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Sorry about that, have struck my vote and comment. In my defence the erroneous AllMusic bio is the first reference in the article but I should have noticed, imv Atlantic306 ( talk) 22:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Lovari (musician)

Lovari (musician) (  | 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)

Doesn't seem to have any notable or significant credits. JDDJS ( talk to mesee what I've done) 03:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC) reply

References for Lovari on Wheel Of Fortune (2023): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV8rMTIQ2C0
https://bobbymgsk.wordpress.com/2023/02/01/wheel-of-fortune-1-31-23/
References for Lovari on Judge Jerry Springer (2022):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U78Iy9fFQkc
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt25965282/releaseinfo/
https://followmy.tv/episodes/2487792/judge-jerry/3x104/103
References for Lovari on Match Game (2019):
https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/match-game-season-four-viewer-votes/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5672484/characters/nm2102281
References for Lovari in The Barn 2 (2022):
https://dailydead.com/horror-highlights-8-found-dead-the-harbinger-the-barn-part-ii/
https://hellhorror.com/movies/the-barn-part-ii-movie-7804.html
https://podcasts.apple.com/es/podcast/trhs-random-chat-with-lovari/id1539578136?i=1000641962062
https://getoutmag.com/lovari-5/ 98.109.154.93 ( talk) 04:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun ( talk) 16:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC) reply

I added filmography and television appearances of the subject that reflect current dates through May 2024. 170.212.0.95 ( talk) 19:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Categories

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

References


Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook