Talk:Deaths in March 2023

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Years Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Johnny Johnson and the Bandwagon

Raising here the merits of this edit by Rusted AutoParts. I disagree with the removal of Johnny Johnson (singer)'s death from the Deaths page. Johnson was a moderately successful soul/pop singer, initially as leader of a group, the Bandwagon. After the group split up, Johnson continued to have hit records, which were credited as by "Johnny Johnson and the Bandwagon" but were performed by Johnson with anonymous backing musicians and singers. Johnson was the only notable member of the outfit, but was not independently notable as he had no career outside of the credited group name. To me, there is no doubt that Johnson was sufficiently notable for his death to be listed, and the removal of his name from the Deaths list seems to be based on the happenstance that he was only credited under a group name. Thoughts as to how this can be resolved? Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghmyrtle:, RAP is a law unto himself on here sometimes. Johnny Johnson definitely merits inclusion. I've restored. Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 22:33, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to have to take offense on two fronts here. Firstly, I objectively did provide an edit summary explanation. Secondly, "a law unto himself"? I was going by prior standard, where if a bandmember redirect to a page about the group, they don't get retained. I fully stated perhaps he did qualify to remain, but I was operating off prior experience, not off of being my own authority. Rusted AutoParts 22:59, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not eligible for inclusion, deceased must have OWN article. As noted above, he "was not independently notable". WWGB (talk) 00:29, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WWGB - This misses the point. The substantive content of the article concerns the musician Johnny Johnson. However, he was usually credited by the record company as "Johnny Johnson and the Bandwagon", which is the correct page title. Claiming that he "was not independently notable" is a misrepresentation - as a recording artist and performer he was notable but, presumably for commercial reasons which should not be relevant here, was usually credited on record together with his former band's name. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Someone must have noticed that I re-added him to the list some hours ago? He has a significant mention of biography within the redirected Johnny Johnson and the Bandwagon article - birth details, death details, and a little of his extra activity. That means the inclusion should take place over and above the "no redirects" rule, which is certainly not hard and fast for EVERY redirect nor is it intended to be. Ref ^(chew)(do) 12:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I confess I had missed that latest edit. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay. By the way, I found out the hard way about redirects, after starting out my editing career trying to remove all of them after 30 days. They're not designed for such a sweeping indictment, I discovered, and Johnny should not be a victim of misunderstanding on redirects. Ref ^(chew)(do) 14:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "misunderstanding" here, we are having this discussion to seek consensus. The only deceased without their own biography accepted previously were victims of a killing ("killing of ...") and members of duos and family bands (eg, Everly Brothers). At the moment, deaths like this slip through the consensus gap. The outcome of our discussion will make it less problematic next time there is a similar death. WWGB (talk) 14:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Remove entry. Not notable for a historical death page, unless the individual's article is created without a redirect. Wylie pedia @ 07:52, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that if the band leader (usually lead singer) is part of the band's name, and is the only constant member over the years, with only a cursory mention of other members in the article, then he or she is notable enough. Editrite! (talk) 08:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Either he passes muster as a stand-alone article or he should be removed. As it stands, he's an anonymous, aliased figure with minimal yet over-emphasized coverage in the band's article. Star Garnet (talk) 16:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An "anonymous, aliased figure"??. His real name was Johnny Mathis - unsurprisingly, he chose to use his stepfather's surname instead. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given the amount of biographical information on the man not the band (not substantial, but still more than even a start-out stub reveals), the option should really be to rename the article to that of the redirect, not dismiss the main kingpin of an historically popular group as non-notable. Ref ^(chew)(do) 16:43, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That’s what I proposed to Ghmyrtle on my talk page but they asserted it was Johnny and the Bandwagon that was notable. Rusted AutoParts 16:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The outfit was either credited as "The Bandwagon" (initially) or (after the other members had left) as "Johnny Johnson and the Bandwagon" - which comprised Johnson plus anonymous studio or touring musicians. Johnson was the lead singer of a notable "band", but was not notable outside the "band", and as far as I know did not record as a named solo performer. In my view he doesn't merit a separate article, and the existing article should not be renamed. But he is still notable, and his name is well known in relevant music circles. In my view he should be listed, and if the past conventions here don't allow that, the conventions (for that is what they are) should either be ignored or changed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ghmyrtle Sadly, under developing consensus (it seems from what I read above), your two stances cancel each other out and therefore I can see him being removed from the list in the near future. No cake to both eat and keep here, I often find. Ref ^(chew)(do) 08:18, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Refsworldlee - I'm not convinced that the supposed "developing consensus" of a small coterie of committed editors who both establish and enforce the guidelines should outweigh both WP:IAR and common sense, but... Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As you'll know, that still remains to be seen here. Not a done deal. Ref ^(chew)(do) 08:57, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So...where do we stand here? Does Johnson get an exemption, or do we stick to the set standard? Rusted AutoParts 22:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

By my count, the voting is 4:4, so "no consensus". It's no big deal to keep this entry, but it does not set a precedent for every dead Foobar who fronted a band called Foobar and the Poobars. WWGB (talk) 05:28, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As already stated in the discussions above, subjects who are the main focus of "Killing of" or "Death of" entries, and who have a basic bio included in its event article, get to stay in the list after the one month grace period. I really can't see why this should not apply to major players in a music group article who also have that crucial biographical detail included. No-one in life is basically notable for their death, it's just the circumstances of their death that alter the notability perception. Johnson in particular was eminently notable for starting and maintaining the music group from within which he plyed his trade. There's the possible injustice of his removal. Ref ^(chew)(do) 08:57, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]