Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Plini

Plini (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BAND. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 01:42, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Why has this been tagged for deletion? -John Weiss — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Weiss ( talk • contribs) 04:26, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply

@ John Weiss:- Because, it apparently does not meet Wikipedia notability standard for inclusion. It already has been speedy deleted, perhaps twice under WP:CSD#A7 criteria. We here, would discuss the subject if it actually is suitable for inclusion or not. Please take a look at WP:BAND, and improve the present article to save it from deletion. You may place your arguments here, against deletion of the article. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 11:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
This article does meet at least the first criteria for notability. Since it was previously deleted, I added some more sources to make that more clear. There is no reason for this page to be deleted. -John Weiss — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Weiss ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Whatever sources, the present article have, are primary and self-published sources and does not help to establish notability of the subject. And, do login before you make a comment on behalf of your Wikipedia account. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 17:43, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
I don't see how those websites are considered "self-published." And I apologize for not logging in at first. John Weiss ( talk) 18:48, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
I see no reason not to keep this page. John Weiss ( talk) 02:55, 1 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I see no good reason to keep this, other than the band may more become notable over time, but we don't host articles about up-and-coming or borderline-notable bands or artists. Looking at the sources, I see directory listings, youtube links, user reviews or blog reviews, a brief paragraph, links to pages that seem to be maintained by the band itself -- none of which count as significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I don't see this meeting criterion #1 of WP:BAND or any other criterion. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 00:01, 2 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. The sources I've given are more than reliable. The subject is very well-known, and I've given multiple reviews from legitimate sources that are not the artist himself, or anybody close to the artist. This definitely meets the first criteria for notability. John Weiss ( talk) 04:56, 3 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    It may help if the article is expanded some more. Have the songs charted? Are any specific songs hits? The article, as is, seems fairly vague and I'm having trouble seeing the notability. Why not work on it while it's going through the AFD process and see if that helps. :-) Bali88 ( talk) 06:25, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica 1000 05:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
I'm not seeing any sources in that list that meet all three criteria: (a) significant coverage, (b) reliable source, and (c) independent. All of them fail at least one. Therefore, I stand by my delete comment above. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 17:26, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - The reviews of the band's works are overwhelmingly positive. They will likely become notable in the future. However, I don't think there's enough at this point for their own page. Perhaps the author could look into the possibility of a mention on the main page for the label. Bali88 ( talk) 17:43, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    Keep You haven't even seemed to take more than a glance at this article or the references. The subject of the article has an obvious fan-base, and is well-known. The actual reviews I've given are neither self-published or unreliable. I have several references on this article, however, that can't really be considered standalone sources for obvious reasons. But they're there because I try to get as many sources as possible. And for personal information such as birthday and location. I did plenty of research on the subject, and it's obviously enough to prove that Plini is a notable musician. I see absolutely no reason to delete this article. I was surprised that I was the first to make an article for such a well-known musician. He's obviously not a mainstream charting musician, but he's definitely notable. He was a member of a well-known (albeit independent) band, and has released music to critical acclaim. In addition to having a steady fan-base, which should be more than apparent. John Weiss ( talk) 19:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    That being said, I will try and work on this page to make it less vague. But I still think it should be kept. John Weiss ( talk) 19:46, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    You can't !vote more than once. Radiopathy •talk• 19:53, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    He did vote once. The first one was really just a response comment. I fixed the indentations to clarify that.
    I see two "keeps" that might be interpreted as voting aside from the one you indented. I put a strike through the second one to make it clear. :-) Bali88 ( talk) 14:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    And John Weiss, I did look carefully at every. single. source. I stand by my position. The references provided are numerous but are mostly not valid to establish notability. Therefore, this musician doesn't meet the first criteria of WP:MUSICBIO, which was the basis of your argument to keep. I see no evidence that any other criteria have been met. I do agree that this musician is certainly getting attention. But we don't publish articles about musicians who are up-and-coming. They must have already arrived. Plini, so far, has not, although he may be getting there. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 05:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    Plini is not "up and coming." He's obviously notable, and does in fact meet the first criteria as I've proven. I've given at least one reliable, non self-published, independant outside source. Again, I will try my best to find more information to make that more clear (and I would be grateful if someone else helped), but I still think it works as is. John Weiss ( talk) 18:07, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    No, he isn't "obviously notable" according to Wikipedia notability guidelines. What may be obvious to you isn't obvious to me or others who have commented here. Which source are you referring to? I posted the entire list of sources above and found each of them wanting. The article is now larded with a huge number of non-sources that only serves to give the illusion of notability. Kindly point out the sources that you believe are adequate to establish notability. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 18:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Delete It clearly fails WP:BAND: no independent sources or appearance on a national chart.-- SabreBD ( talk) 20:29, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to his band Halcyon (band). That one has one good ref, better than this. If that's deleted then delete this too. Plini lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. The analysis of sources by Amatulić is right. duffbeerforme ( talk) 02:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Plini&oldid=1167401487"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC) reply

Plini

Plini (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BAND. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 01:42, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Why has this been tagged for deletion? -John Weiss — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Weiss ( talk • contribs) 04:26, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply

@ John Weiss:- Because, it apparently does not meet Wikipedia notability standard for inclusion. It already has been speedy deleted, perhaps twice under WP:CSD#A7 criteria. We here, would discuss the subject if it actually is suitable for inclusion or not. Please take a look at WP:BAND, and improve the present article to save it from deletion. You may place your arguments here, against deletion of the article. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 11:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
This article does meet at least the first criteria for notability. Since it was previously deleted, I added some more sources to make that more clear. There is no reason for this page to be deleted. -John Weiss — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Weiss ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Whatever sources, the present article have, are primary and self-published sources and does not help to establish notability of the subject. And, do login before you make a comment on behalf of your Wikipedia account. Anupmehra - Let's talk! 17:43, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
I don't see how those websites are considered "self-published." And I apologize for not logging in at first. John Weiss ( talk) 18:48, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
I see no reason not to keep this page. John Weiss ( talk) 02:55, 1 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. I see no good reason to keep this, other than the band may more become notable over time, but we don't host articles about up-and-coming or borderline-notable bands or artists. Looking at the sources, I see directory listings, youtube links, user reviews or blog reviews, a brief paragraph, links to pages that seem to be maintained by the band itself -- none of which count as significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I don't see this meeting criterion #1 of WP:BAND or any other criterion. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 00:01, 2 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. The sources I've given are more than reliable. The subject is very well-known, and I've given multiple reviews from legitimate sources that are not the artist himself, or anybody close to the artist. This definitely meets the first criteria for notability. John Weiss ( talk) 04:56, 3 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    It may help if the article is expanded some more. Have the songs charted? Are any specific songs hits? The article, as is, seems fairly vague and I'm having trouble seeing the notability. Why not work on it while it's going through the AFD process and see if that helps. :-) Bali88 ( talk) 06:25, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica 1000 05:17, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
I'm not seeing any sources in that list that meet all three criteria: (a) significant coverage, (b) reliable source, and (c) independent. All of them fail at least one. Therefore, I stand by my delete comment above. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 17:26, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - The reviews of the band's works are overwhelmingly positive. They will likely become notable in the future. However, I don't think there's enough at this point for their own page. Perhaps the author could look into the possibility of a mention on the main page for the label. Bali88 ( talk) 17:43, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    Keep You haven't even seemed to take more than a glance at this article or the references. The subject of the article has an obvious fan-base, and is well-known. The actual reviews I've given are neither self-published or unreliable. I have several references on this article, however, that can't really be considered standalone sources for obvious reasons. But they're there because I try to get as many sources as possible. And for personal information such as birthday and location. I did plenty of research on the subject, and it's obviously enough to prove that Plini is a notable musician. I see absolutely no reason to delete this article. I was surprised that I was the first to make an article for such a well-known musician. He's obviously not a mainstream charting musician, but he's definitely notable. He was a member of a well-known (albeit independent) band, and has released music to critical acclaim. In addition to having a steady fan-base, which should be more than apparent. John Weiss ( talk) 19:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    That being said, I will try and work on this page to make it less vague. But I still think it should be kept. John Weiss ( talk) 19:46, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    You can't !vote more than once. Radiopathy •talk• 19:53, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    He did vote once. The first one was really just a response comment. I fixed the indentations to clarify that.
    I see two "keeps" that might be interpreted as voting aside from the one you indented. I put a strike through the second one to make it clear. :-) Bali88 ( talk) 14:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    And John Weiss, I did look carefully at every. single. source. I stand by my position. The references provided are numerous but are mostly not valid to establish notability. Therefore, this musician doesn't meet the first criteria of WP:MUSICBIO, which was the basis of your argument to keep. I see no evidence that any other criteria have been met. I do agree that this musician is certainly getting attention. But we don't publish articles about musicians who are up-and-coming. They must have already arrived. Plini, so far, has not, although he may be getting there. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 05:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    Plini is not "up and coming." He's obviously notable, and does in fact meet the first criteria as I've proven. I've given at least one reliable, non self-published, independant outside source. Again, I will try my best to find more information to make that more clear (and I would be grateful if someone else helped), but I still think it works as is. John Weiss ( talk) 18:07, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
    No, he isn't "obviously notable" according to Wikipedia notability guidelines. What may be obvious to you isn't obvious to me or others who have commented here. Which source are you referring to? I posted the entire list of sources above and found each of them wanting. The article is now larded with a huge number of non-sources that only serves to give the illusion of notability. Kindly point out the sources that you believe are adequate to establish notability. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 18:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Delete It clearly fails WP:BAND: no independent sources or appearance on a national chart.-- SabreBD ( talk) 20:29, 4 May 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to his band Halcyon (band). That one has one good ref, better than this. If that's deleted then delete this too. Plini lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. The analysis of sources by Amatulić is right. duffbeerforme ( talk) 02:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Plini&oldid=1167401487"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE