Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians

Shortcuts

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:

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.
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.

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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bands and musicians. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Related deletion sorting

Bands and musicians

Morag McLaren

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't find anything that suggests Morag McLaren is notable. The only source in the article is very weak. Guiy de Montfort de L'Amaury 00:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Music, Theatre, and Scotland. Guiy de Montfort de L'Amaury 00:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Dance. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can see plenty of coverage in the British Newspaper Archive. I'll add it and come back to vote. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed Yaqubian

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to meet WP:NMUSICIAN. No coverage anywhere I can find, mahoor.com is broken and much of the other links currently present are download links. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:08, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:08, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:31, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Foxtails (band)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NBAND. Going through the 6 sources, the first is their personal bandcamp, the second is an article I don't have access to but it seems connected to the band, the third is "foxtails interview", fourth is "new album out now", fifth is a review of one of their albums (no significant coverage about the band), and sixth is an interview about a new EP release. My external searches give me little more than what is here already. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 17:27, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 17:27, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dante Henderson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As per WP:NRSNVNA. Fails Verifiability and i couldn’t find any coverage of him. Apart from a very old Washington post mentioning him, there is no recent coverage whatsoever. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 13:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Dance. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 13:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Missouri. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 17:05, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eli Jae

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and Wikipedia general notability guidelines. Ibjaja055 (talk) 06:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 06:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Cited sources are the usual promotional music releases and public relations, nothing we can use to write an encyclopedic entry. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:50, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It appears the subject does not have enough valid secondary sourcing to confirm notability under WP:GNG. Source #10 also says that it's from GQ South Africa, but this is a lie, it's from "Music in Africa.Net". m a MANÍ¹⁹⁹⁰ 🌵 ^{(talk | contribs)} 13:07, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amzy B

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Almost all the sources are either promotional pieces or unreliable. Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 05:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable musical artist, fails WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:27, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails to meet WP:GNG (WP:MUSICBIO) category. User generated social media content available. No sufficient material to establish WP:N. QEnigma talk 05:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parker Bailey

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails all notability (even GNG). No sourced references. Easily merged/linked with notable association page: Horatio Parker if deemed notable for mention. Maineartists (talk) 23:34, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Law, and Connecticut. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ThisGuy (talk • contributions) 17:11, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Taylor (music entrepreneur)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable stub - could not find significant independent sources on Google. Fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:NBLP - the related article Iron Maiden does not even mention the subject. LR.127 (talk) 21:22, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. LR.127 (talk) 21:22, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - He is indeed a longtime member of the Iron Maiden management team and may deserve to be mentioned at their article, but he is less prominent than head honcho Rod Smallwood. Despite decades of service, Taylor has not received enough individual media coverage to support an article here. Otherwise, the existing article looks like an attempted resume and promotion for his company. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:59, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marnz Malone

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a musician, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC.
As always, musicians are not "inherently" notable just for existing, and have to show passage of certain specific NMUSIC criteria supported by a WP:GNG-worthy volume of reliable source coverage about them -- but as written, this literally just states that he's a musician who exists, while failing to expand on his existence with even one statement about his career that could be measured against NMUSIC at all. And it's supported by just one footnote, which is reliable and substantive but not enough -- even if you're going for NMUSIC #1 ("notable because media coverage exists"), it still takes more than just one hit of media coverage to get there, and the article still has to say considerably more than just "he exists, the end".
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when he has a more substantive notability claim and better sourcing for it, but one hit of media coverage verifying that he exists is not enough all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Bearcat (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are other sources that already demonstrate notability. I just haven't had time to add them to the article yet. --Viennese Waltz 18:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The way this works is not "create an inadequate article that just says he exists first and then try to make it pass muster later" — the way this works is that you keep it in your sandbox or draftspace until you have already put enough work in it to make it pass muster right off the top, and then move it only after you're done. That is, you put all of the work it needs into it first, and then create it second, not vice versa. Bearcat (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as having no evidence of passing MUSICBIO. I made mistakes like this as a newbie. Probably WP:TOOSOON. Bearian (talk) 04:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of classical music composers by era

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The long list uses no sources thus violating WP:V and has no inclusion criteria, essentially, the composers are chosen arbitrarily, thus going against WP:LISTCRITERIA. On top of it, the list is practically unusable, as the content is not searchable, so it is not possible to locate a composer unless one knows the dates of his life - but with this knowledge there is little use for a timeline. A reader of this AfD might try, for example to locate Cesar Cui as an exercise. The same Cesar Cui was part of The Five, but it is almost impossible to decipher from the chosen way of representation, as the pieces of timeline are split arbitrarily, thus creating false impression of periodic composers' mass extinctions, like the one in 1610 (section "Renaissance era"). As a result, The Five's lives are literally cut into pieces. We already have Lists of composers#Western classical period that are way more readable, so an issue of WP:CFORK also pops up. Викидим (talk) 08:45, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Music. Shellwood (talk) 11:41, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Redirects to Lists of composers#Era have been reverted several times. Noting there has been discussion about how the timeline has limited functionality. – The Grid (talk) 13:58, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Even if it had sources, this thing would still be an unencyclopedic mess. That and the impossibility of imposing inclusion criteria make deletion the only possible choice. I suppose such a chart could possibly be used in a much more limited way, say among a group of composers for whom inclusion criteria can be established, like The Five or Les Six. But even so, it wouldn't be encyclopedic. As it stands, on top of the reasons given by nominator, this would still qualify for deletion according to WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and History. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:55, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Has been around forever, has had over 2 million views in less than a decade, so some people must find it useful. Unusually for a list, all the entries have linked articles, so references are very easily found. I'm not impressed by the other arguments in the nom, and would like to hear how deletion would actually improve the encyclopedia. Probably its a good thing to recognise Cesar Cui's distinct individuality for a change. Johnbod (talk) 19:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cesar Cui came into discussion in a trivial way: I had earnestly tried to search for him, and found the list unusable. One can try their favorite composer, or a random one. Викидим (talk) 20:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, he's not there. He's a very minor figure (all but unknown in the Anglosphere), and probably shouldn't be - the list doesn't claim to be exhaustive. That's no reason to delete the thing. Johnbod (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This should be the job of categories. We don't need separate articles for this. Agletarang (talk) 14:37, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move: We could move this to be a part of the project vital articles for composers, so it wouldn't be WP:CIRC if it's in the same article. Wikieditor662 (talk) 05:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Johnbod (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve upon by adding more text. Someone went through a lot of work to create those charts. Would be a damn shame to delete it. Many incoming links would go broken too. I for one happen to find it very entertaining and educational. -- œ^™ 06:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Children of the Corn (group)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:REFERENCE. Completely unsourced. Darrion N. Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 10:14, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there is a reference in the article but more reliable sources coverage is needed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning to Keep. Per WP:MUSICBIO#1 there's a number of reliable sources with coverage of this group now cited in the article. The subject appears to be a part of hip-hop history, that effectively launched the careers of several notable artists. As such, the subject also meets WP:MUSICBIO#6. ResonantDis_tortion 10:56, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But is it reliable enough? Think about it. It only relies on one member. That's it. We're referring to the group itself. Darrion N. Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 22:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DBrown SPS The article, as it currently stands, is fully cited to a number of reliable secondary sources which also remark upon the impact of COC ("celebrities of the underground rap scene, COC ran Harlem streets and cypher circles in the mid-1990s"). The premise of your original nomination was incorrect, as highlighted above. If you want this article removed you need to provide a much clearer deletion rationale, preferably with WP:BEFORE evidence and reference to WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion 06:42, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I see it is improving now. Thanks anyways. Crisis averted. Darrion N. Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 07:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Small Leaks Sink Ships

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article moved to main space without verification, no notable media sources. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 12:10, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Dmitry Bobriakov (talk) 12:10, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A quick search identified 3 critical reviews in WP:RSMUSIC sources: Punknews, Exclaim!, Allmusic. Subject appears to be notable per WP:MUSICBIO#1. ResonantDis_tortion 17:07, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. ResonantDis_tortion 17:31, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as well as the above mentioned reliable sources coverage there is also this album review on Sputnik Musik here so that WP:GNG is passed in my opinion, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:25, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Big Smart

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR, WP:ENT, WP: ANYBIO or WP:GNG. All the sources are either promotional pieces or unreliable. Ibjaja055 (talk) 23:06, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 23:06, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not appear to have reliable secondary sourcing to confirm notability for WP:GNG. Mamani1990 (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There are some WP:GNG-sources in the article but I could be wrong; so, delete.. Ahola .O (talk) 00:57, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Dance. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:25, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Absolutely nothing to establish WP:ENT or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:27, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marko Meko

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSIC. The subject lacks significant independent sources to establish notability, as most sources are primary, local, or promotional. The achievements mentioned (e.g., DJ performances, single releases) are insufficient to demonstrate notability. The article's promotional tone further detracts from its encyclopedic value. Deletion is recommended unless substantial, reliable sources are provided. Jaypung (talk) 01:49, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The user Injusticegod edited the same article on Simple English Wikipedia Marko Meko and subsequently recreated the article here on Standard English Wikipedia. This raises concerns about a COI or UPE. Please consider this context during the discussion. Jaypung (talk) 01:54, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Egypt. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:21, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bunge Burunje

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. The sources could not establish WP:SIGCOV. Ibjaja055 (talk) 23:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Music, and Ethiopia. Ibjaja055 (talk) 23:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No sources for this person. The ones in the article are very brief, and the website is a news and advertising service. I'm unsure if it's promotional or not, but we have no sourcing anyway. Oaktree b (talk) 23:42, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree with Oaktree b. No sources, could be promotional. LarryL33k (Contribz) 05:03, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Favi

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO, WP:COMPOSER and WP:GNG. Almost all the sources are either promotional, puff pieces or unreliable. Ibjaja055 (talk) 20:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Nigeria. Ibjaja055 (talk) 20:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Note from the previous AfD (about a year and a half ago) that articles on this singer were rejected in the Draft system multiple times, but somebody snuck it into mainspace anyway. This has happened again and little has changed for the singer. Still an up-and-comer with material on the standard self-upload platforms and publicity announcements reprinted by the usual non-critical Nigerian hype publications. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 21:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Is this a HOAX? He had an article in 2008, but only began singing in 2015 and now in 2023? If he's not made any notability in the nearly 20 years since the first AfD, I'm not sure what else there is to say. Releasing music on a streaming platform isn't notable. Source used aren't RS or very marginal. Oaktree b (talk) 21:29, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The 2008 AfD was for someone else with a similar name, listed at the top of this page due to an apparent glitch. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 21:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks for the explanation. I still don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Alternative hip-hop is still a relatively niche genre in Nigeria, with only about 5-10% of the population listening to Nigerian artists in this space. In comparison, the genre has a much larger following in the United States, where about 40-50% of listeners are into alternative hip-hop. From the research I’ve done, artists like Odumodu Blvck, Favi, and Psycho YP are among the ones really standing out in this scene. Given the growing attention they’re receiving from respected Nigerian sources, I believe they meet the notability guidelinesWP:GNG and are well-covered by reliable references WP:NG/RS Jellymanpro (talk) 01:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC) Sock strike. Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 09:10, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No evidence of passing WP:COMPOSER, WP:MUSICBIO or WP:ANYBIO. Sources are mostly music release and public relations. A cursory search yields nothing useful. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:28, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Easher Austin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This subject is not eligible for an entry into Wikipedia as the references in the article are all primary and there is nothing elsewhere that can be added to the article to demonstrate their notability. The creator is the subject of the article himself. This is a significant COI. Centuristic (talk) 06:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and United Kingdom. Centuristic (talk) 06:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:49, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No sources pop up for this guy; clearly self-advertising. Why? I Ask (talk) 06:54, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. Also not notable for youtube stuff, very low viewcount, 633 subs. Polygnotus (talk) 07:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Pretty bad case of self-promotion. YouTube channel not notable. Procyon117 (talk) 15:14, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not notable. Also, not dispositive of anything, but worth noting that I got a post on my talk page after I'd restored content they'd deleted. They claimed to be the subject of the article and saying that they wanted the page deleted. Plandu (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tony McGuinness (English musician)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Soybean46 (talk · contribs) tagged this article for deletion and added the nomination subpage to the daily list, but did not actually create the subpage. Nonetheless, a rationale was given in an edit summary: Nominated article for deletion, doesnt meet SIGCOV. I note that there are other tags since October 2015 that also indicate COI and OR issues, but my involvement here is entirely procedural and I offer no actual opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Advertising, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Current sourcing in the article is terrible. Having said that, there is no option to delete here; per WP:BANDMEMBER we need to either redirect to Above & Beyond (band), or keep as a seperate article. To keep as a seperate article then evidence is needed to show McGuiness is notable independently of the bands he plays in. On a quick search the following are evidence supporting independent notability: DJ Mag Germany, DJ Mag Latin America, EDM.com. I will look for further sources when I have time. ResonantDis_tortion 09:30, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Habermann

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per question raised by User:Maineartists at Wikipedia:Help_desk#copyvio. Page was created in 2005 as a verbatim copy of the musician's own webpage at the time. See the 2004 archive of the musician's website https://web.archive.org/web/20040204000620/http://www.michaelhabermann.com/ and the initial 2005 version of our article https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Michael_Habermann&oldid=24277064 There is no copyright mention on the archived musician's website so we have to assume it was copyrighted. His current page, https://www.michaelhabermann.com/ is copyrighted 2001, and the ABOUT MICHAEL HABERMANN subpage, https://www.michaelhabermann.com/about/_index.html is unchanged from the version we copied in 2005. There are only minor differences between the current article and the initial 2005 version, and the cited sources are simple bio entries, so in my opinion this is a WP:TNT situation. The entire article should be deleted as a copyvio, and recreated with independent sources if warranted. Meters (talk) 02:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, France, Canada, Mexico, Maryland, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:16, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - even after all these years, CopyVio still reports 79.3% similarity to the subject's web site.--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Maineartists (talk) 16:21, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Twenty years ago, a lot of original research and copyvios snuck into Wikipedia, but we have been working steadily to find and fix these problems. Substantively there was never notability. Bearian (talk) 04:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've removed the copyvio. Article may now be judged on its own merits. (And a comment to that front: the gbooks source looks good, but it's just one source). GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 05:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheryl Moana Marie Nunes

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is only notable due to her marriage with Antonio Sabàto Jr. - see WP:INVALIDBIO. Martey (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Entertainment. Martey (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I disagree with the comment on her notability tied to her husband. The only section that has sourcing is her Personal life. The career section is totally not sourced, but that section shows her notability. — Maile (talk) 01:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Advertising, Beauty pageants, American football, California, Hawaii, and Oregon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:26, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confused. This person is clearly a big celebrity, but she doesn't have a lot of coverage in mainstream media, leading me to wonder why she's gotten so little coverage, at least from what I see on Googling, from them compared to what's in the article. Has there been a blacklist? Is she just famous for being famous? What's going on? I'm genuinely interested in an answer, so please ping me. Bearian (talk) 03:31, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robin del Castillo

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SINGER. His supposed international tour has been unsourced for years, and he clearly doesn't pass GNG. Badbluebus (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Bands and musicians, Latin America, and Colombia. Badbluebus (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - moving from one country to another is not an "international tour." Bearian (talk) 06:57, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Wolf (musician)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I Believe this artcile should be deleted as the article is not notable and the writer of the article has a Conflict of interest. Jake Jakubowski ^Talk 20:13, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing me towards the notability requirements of the platform. Several updates have been implemented over the past week that I believe meet the requested changes. 71.88.44.206 (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This IP address is Jim Wolf himself, Conflict of interest. If you check the history of this page he has done most of the edits he does himself. Jake Jakubowski ^Talk 23:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jake-jakubowski - this AFD was never transcluded to the log and was missing the templates. I have tried to fix it for you.Jay8g [V•T•E] 04:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Connecticut, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:27, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is an Allmusic staff biography which is sigcov sourcing per WP:RSMUSIC: [1]. This profile is sigcov: Korea Herald, which is 5 years after his music became popular so is evidence of WP:SUSTAINED. The New York Times also appears to substantiate the charting in Korea: [2]. Potential here for meeting WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. ResonantDis_tortion 23:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. ResonantDis_tortion 23:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion such as AllMusic and the Korea Herald which support the claim of a hit single on a national chart which therefore passes criteria 2 of WP:NMUSIC in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:08, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Verano (band)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability, doesn't meet WP:NMUSIC/WP:SIGCOV. I'm unable to verify the chart positions for the singles as germancharts.de and offiziellecharts.de show nothing for this band. Frost 11:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Same as nom - unable to verify the charting, or find any evidence the subject meets any aspect of WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion 20:46, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no news could be found in my search and neither can verify the chart positions.Darkm777 (talk) 03:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NMUSIC. No press releases, no interviews, no prizes, nothing. Polygnotus (talk) 08:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:49, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Parnell

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 01:07, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:33, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of WP:SIGCOV. Sounds like an interesting person, but that's not a good reason to keep. Bearian (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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

The result was delete‎. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:36, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moped (band)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable rock band with there not being any sources I could find about them. GamerPro64 19:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New Zealand. GamerPro64 19:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 08:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no news could be found in my search. Darkm777 (talk) 03:25, 15 January 2025 (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.

Demzy BaYe

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and all the sources cannot count toward WP: GNG. There are also elements of source farming here, in June 2024, this source was published in up to nine ([3] , [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] different newspapers with different titles but same contents word for word. Probably, the subject's notability is tied to being the originator of Baye Dance step, however, the dance step is also not notable. I would have redirect it to Dance with a Purpose Academy (DWP Academy) but it has no page on Wikipedia. Ibjaja055 (talk) 10:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Dance, and Ghana. Ibjaja055 (talk) 10:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In accepting the draft of this article, I considered it under WP:NMUSICOTHER, and yes, took the invention of dance steps to be notable, supported by national shows and performances, as documented. I don't think we're seeing source farming - rather, as happens with AP and similar, a base article was probably produced in one source location and circulated (it's not a press release) - the piece was found in respectable sources such as the Accra Times - so the only limitation is that that counts only once. Given performance, choreography, etc., I believe GNG is met, if not by much - I've seen a lot of less-well-attested articles (and yes, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is valid, but I weight what there is vs. the source base in Ghana). SeoR (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SeoR Thanks for the explanation but I took my time to go through all the sources and couldn't find GNG sources. The widely circulated source is highly promotional with flowery languages.hijacking the internet...He boasts a remarkable footprint... the multidimensional dance powerhouse whose talent has garnered widespread admiration and inspired an entire generation. .... Other sources are social media gossips like [11] [12] [13] and so on. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming back, and I see your point. I do think the over-circulated article could be genuine "entertainment journalism" which often tends to the flowery, but I agree it's not ideal. And the "gossipy" materials are only good for background, not as primary references. I will try to search some of the main Ghana media sites for more. In the end, this was a "Random AfC" and I have no attachment, but I am aware that our coverage of areas such as arts in most non-EU, non-Anglosphere countries could use a boost, so I'd be loathe to lose an article with real potential. SeoR (talk) 00:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HueningKai

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of this article has not yet demonstrated individual notability outside of his band, Tomorrow X Together, which is a criteria per the notability guideline at WP:BANDMEMBER. This is evident from the largely empty "Career" section that shows very little in the way of individual activity that would assist in establishing individual notability.

Subject has not released any solo singles that have charted anywhere that could assist in establishing individual notability, or participated in any activities of note outside of his membership in the band. The article mentions his individual participation in a YouTube series, which was uploaded onto the band's YouTube channel, but it doesn't seem to have received WP:SIGCOV outside of a few sources that are largely churned from a press release.

Recommend redirect to Tomorrow X Together

Note this AfD is the result of a contested WP:BLAR RachelTensions (talk) 03:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Korea, and South Korea. RachelTensions (talk) 03:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: as the person hasn't met WP:MUSICBIO in general. 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 02:33, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Tomorrow X Together. Subject is not independently notable. Random86 (talk) 04:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Coppen

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 15:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Albums and songs, and Indonesia. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 15:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nominator. Does not show enough Notability to be included in mainspace. Pizza on Pineapple🍕 (talk) 16:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep sent it to draftspace days back but I've seen alot of improvement source-wise and contentwise, passes WP:GNG at it's current state but still doubtful on WP:NACTOR. ANU^writes 04:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes NACTOR through roles in Romeo & Juminten and Best Friends Forever. Also appears to pass GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 13:18, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article needs cleanup and expansion (the Indonesian corresponding article can be of use) but she seems to meet the requirements of WP:NACTOR with significant roles in notable productions that received coverage (not all have a page on this Wikipedia (yet)) -Mushy Yank. 23:14, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sal Villanueva

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is only mentioned in passing in the one source. Could find no sources with WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:ANYBIO/ WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: there is evidence that he produced a certified gold album, Tell All Your Friends. Bearian (talk) 23:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:53, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Combs

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There isn't any significant coverage by reliable sources for this individual. Doesn't meet WP:NMUSIC or WP:NBASIC. A draft also exists at Draft:David Combs. Frost 17:34, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Maryland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 03:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would redirect it to one of his two main bands. Bearian (talk) 00:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, can you specify a Redirect target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:16, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Ivory Williams Jr.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NENTERTAINER. While the article breathlessly claims Williams Jr. as a pioneer in the evolution of Contemporary Gospel music and Jazz fusion, this just isn't borne out by the available sources. The cited sources do not adequately provide secondary coverage of Williams Jr.'s life or accomplishments, and throughout the article claims of significance are backed up by listings in discographies (e.g. [14]) and the like.

Doing my own search for sources, I was able to find coverage of Williams Jr.'s evidently more-notable father, Williams Sr., which mentions Jr. briefly ([15]) and mere-mentions in catalogs (e.g. [16]), but nothing that would satisfy ntoability guidelines. The article's primary editor has a COI, which was acknowledged on their user talk page. I think that redirecting this page to Jr's notable father, Harold Ivory Williams, is appropriate here. I believe this still merits consideration at AfD rather than WP:BLAR, as it has been repeatedly been submitted and declined at AfC prior to being accepted by a reviewer. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Maryland. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Ivory Williams is listed as a pioneer by virtue of the time period of the birth of the

both the Fusion (1959-1990) in particular the added element of Gospel (Harold Ivory Williams being the first to add the Organ with Gospel structured chords) on the "On the Corner" project with Miles Davis) and the transition of the conventional Golden Era Gospel to Contemporary Gospel as evidenced on of his solo performance at the Carnegie Hall) to Contemporary Gospel. Traditional Jazz did not have the element of electronic instruments (in particular the Fender Rhodes introduced in the 70,s as an example) as Fusion. The timing of the references demonstrates that he was one of the pioneers in that era and the first to add gospel element. In fact Miles sought him out because of that. Like wise, the Golden Era of Gospel that my father was a part of evolved in the late 60's but the jazz element began in the 70's. I attempted to demonstrate those claims with projects in the specific time frames. I used the word pioneer ^[1] because that is what a pioneer is according to your own definition. (Involving accomplishments or activities that have not been done before, or developing or using new methods or techniques) Someone that is a participatory factor in the beginning or birthing period. Both Miles Davis official website and James Cleveland's Carnegie Hall performance validate that claim.

As the author of the article, I would like to thank Wikipedia for allowing me to contribute. I vote keepWilliamsivy (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The argumentation you provide here would be reasonable for a magazine article or research paper to make. Wikipedia, however, is not a publisher of original thought; we want existing reliable sources to directly state what the subject is or isn't, not to infer it by association. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a regular WP user, I found the article - about an artist unknown to me who contributed to some of my favourite songs - very informative and I thank the author. If anything, maybe delete the opionions or parts that do not seem to be to be within WP's bounds only or maybe and some sources. 95.98.136.193 (talk) 19:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am gathering sources that show that every musician on Miles Davis projects that include Harol Ivory Williams is given the respect of being recognized as a contributing pioneer to Jazz Fusion. Even many approved articles here on Wikipedia. Why would/should Harold's pioneering contributions to the evolution of Jazz Fusion be excluded or dismissed? Even Miles estate recoognizes his contributions to Fusions behinnings. I will list my claims later today in hopes that efitors at leady see the contridiction in acknowledging some on Wikipedia and denying others. I need to format my claims according to wiki preferences. Williamsivy (talk) 10:52, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please forgive my typos. Williamsivy (talk) 10:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just read the definition of COI and felt that I should explain my position. I am the last of the Williams bloodline, the executor of Harold's Ivory Williams estate, and the last to tell the story of their accomplishments. My brother fell ill on the cusp of international fame. He was recognized and validated by many greats as my parents knew most of them and his talent opened doors. I am still gathering documents to validate those claims. Their is no one else to tell the story. Once again, I am a believer in Wikipedia and a contributor, so I respect and graciously accept what looks like the decision to delete. I would also say that the categories that he would fit in contain the names of many that he mentored and worked along side who's only claim to fame was that they too established themselves in the genre. On another note; We need Wikipedia's contributions to the world and I will fight along side many others to protect and maintain it's right to exist. Williamsivy (talk) 12:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should the unsung deserve being dismissed? Williamsivy (talk) 11:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am waiting for his Grammy Participation certificates on 2 separate projects. Would having a Grammy Certificate be considered notable? One is for the solo performance at Carnegie Hall as noted in the profile page. Williamsivy (talk) 15:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pioneering

Delete Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of notable subjects with notability established by set by criteria established via consensus of the community. Additionally notability is WP:NOTINHERITED by virtue of working with notable people. Not having a Wikipedia article is not a "dismissal" of anyone. Best, GPL93 (talk) 03:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is the purpose of the pages listed as the following: Category: American jazz pianists, Category: American male pianists, Category: Jazz fusion pianists, Category: American organists, Category: American keyboardists, Category:1949 births, Category: Musicians from Baltimore, Category:20th-century American pianists, Category: Jazz musicians from Maryland. I am genuinely confused as to why some qualify as notable and other do not. Surely he fits in those categories at the least. Williamsivy (talk) 11:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories are for sorting and organization, they have no bearing on notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:02, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

La Perdita Generacio

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:Fancruft. This band does not seem to have received sufficient coverage outside of the Esperanto subculture. The only reference that is not in Esperanto is no longer retrievable. Aŭstriano (talk) 01:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Aŭstriano (talk) 01:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 merge‎ to Public image of Taylor Swift. I don't see a reason to delete before merging, as some people suggest - we would need to preserve history in any case. Vanamonde93 (talk) 22:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion of Taylor Swift

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Taking this to AFD after a PROD was contested. Regardless of how it got split off from a public image article, what we have now is heavily bloated with excessive details and fancruft, even more so than what I saw a few months ago. The amount shown within "Fashion and aesthetic" here following a split was plenty and frankly didn't require another page for extended details. We're not supposed to be Swift-o-pedia by making excessive pages on simply anything the press writes pertaining to Taylor per WP:NOTADIARY and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Some pieces are more important than others. To be blunt, the page comes off as a WP:POVFORK dedicated to praising her looks. By no means does it help when clothing is called "classic" outside of quotes or how most (if not all) of the commentary under "Reception" seems to lean towards positive remarks when not just giving matter-of-fact or neutral descriptions. Elaborating on some of the negative criticisms might make this read somewhat less like a puff piece, but either way that wouldn't be enough to salvage the page. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Fashion. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I was hoping to formulate a decisive vote here, but will have to declare myself undecided on the notability of the topic. Swiftyism is severely out of hand and it downright gives me the creeps -- she's barely seen as a human being anymore -- and this particular article continues the madness with cringeworthy fancruft and other types of obsession for which the obsessed should seek psychiatric help. But on the other hand, dozens of reliable media sources have analyzed her fashion style as a cultural phenomenon of public interest, so I cannot conclude that this article topic violates WP policy. Regardless, there should be a community effort to pare it down into something more factual that does not reflect the sensibilities of stalkers. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wholeheartedly agree that many obsessive fans have gotten "severely out of hand" with their overzealous actions. It seems to have made certain journalists who already like Taylor to go over the top with minutiae in their coverage, so one can't always tell how much of that is worth implementing in some capacity. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 15:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Swift's fashion, by the 2024 (which in the 18th year of her career), has received more than enough coverage and notability to warrant a separate article. The cited sources are all listed reliable sources, including major music and fashion publications. ℛonherry☘ 06:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability of publications used isn't the problem here; it instead is neutrality and undue weight. The sheer number of existing sources also doesn't compensate for how the article is loaded with way too many positive remarks. This appears to have been cherry-picked so little to none of comments are even remotely negative. Either way, it's not like she has always gotten unanimous praise for fashion. The article overall reads like something from a fan site or a public relations team. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been contributing at the Bands/Musicians AfD page for a long time, and several of these peripheral Taylor Swift articles have come up over the past few years. I believe most survived because WP policy allows articles that are supported by multiple reliable sources, and the deletion discussions often became lamentations about the obsessive fan prose in those articles, just like here. That is a matter of editing and cleanup, and perhaps the community of editors behind this article could be convinced at the talk page to lighten up on the stalking. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. There's a neutral share of criticism of Swift's fashion within the article, claiming her dressing sense is "normal" and underwhelming for a popstar, which is also reflected in the lead. Neutrality isn't forcing a 50/50 split of opinions when that isn't the case in the sources. Her fashion has been mostly praised in the media, and some of her "normal" clothes have been criticized, which has been proportionately represented in the prose; it's a 70/30. I cannot agree with your claims that this article is "loaded" with praise, which is honestly an exaggeration and is no grounds for deletion. There is always room for improvement and copyediting in any given article, that I'll agree. The prime criterion for the creation of an article on Wikipedia is the notability of its subject, and this subject has received more than enough notability to have an article. Any other concerns only make way for copyediting, not deletion. ℛonherry☘ 00:38, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The body says nothing about "underwhelming" or anything synonymous to that, so I'm not sure where this came from, and nevertheless the lead isn't supposed to introduce new things that get no subsequent mentions within an article. I wasn't suggesting a split had to necessarily be 50/50, just that the page looked overly skewed towards positive. This particularly goes for the "Reception" section where the parts sounding generally negative got quickly followed by journalists trying to counter them. It comes off as an attempt to say "these people who nitpick or don't like her choices are wrong". By no means was I exaggerating when I said "loaded", and I'm not going to sugarcoat how the page contains fancruft. When a page seemingly tries to convey a message of "Taylor looks great and don't listen to the haters of her clothing choices", that is unduly positive weight. That's why I brought up WP:POVFORK earlier, and it mentions The creator of the new article may be sincerely convinced that there is so much information about a certain aspect of a subject that it justifies spinning off a separate article. Any subarticle that deals with opinions about the subject of parent article must include suitably-weighted positive and negative opinions, and/or rebuttals, if available, and the original article should contain a neutral summary of the split article. I'm not convinced it gives enough weight to the latter, even if overall less common than the former. Regardless, it's overkill to have as much detail as the page currently goes into. I would expect that much positive, negative, or neutral commentary to be found in a fashion publication or a gossip rag instead of an encyclopedia. Furthermore, let's not ignore the WP:NOTADIARY policy, which says not every detail reported on someone's life is worth including. It's an oversimplification to assume everything that gets into the news is worth making an article for. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and merge to Public image of Taylor Swift, per above WP:NOTADIARY and WP:FANCRUFT policies stated above. Swift's fashion sense is notable that there is a range of coverage from beauty sites, but I don't see anything here that can't be covered in the public image article. PHShanghai | they/them (talk) 16:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 23:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak keep, but not strongly opposed to a merge to Public image of Taylor Swift. I agree that the current article is bloated, but Taylor Swift's fashion sense and influence on fashion trends does seem to have received a lot of coverage in reliable sources. It doesn't strike me as that unreasonable to think that the impact of the world's biggest pop star on fashion would be a sufficiently notable phenomenon to merit an article. For instance (without intending this as an appeal to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), we have articles on Fashion of Madonna, Fashion of Audrey Hepburn and Fashion of Diana, Princess of Wales, so while I agree that there are WP:FANCRUFT issues here, I don't think the fashion of a very prominent celebrity is inherently FANCRUFT or that this is a topic uniquely of interest to swifties. I lean towards keeping and trying to fix the issues as part of normal editing, but would not be strongly opposed to a selective merge to Public image of Taylor Swift. MCE89 (talk) 23:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Public image of Taylor Swift. I see that is has received an honestly strange amount of coverage, but it is very bloated with fancruft and I don't really see why it needs to be a separate article from Public image of Taylor Swift. I agree that it is not uniquely of interest to swifties, but in my opinion it breaks WP:NOTGOSSIP. Sophisticatedevening (talk) 02:15, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- (merge to Public image of Taylor Swift) -- seconding Sophisticatedevening, 100% hit the nail on the head. My biggest concern would be that Swift is so notable and so well-covered that virtually every aspect of her could technically be spun-off into a standalone article. I think having broad category-like articles are the best way of handling this while respecting notability. MWFwiki (talk) 00:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Public image of Taylor Swift per above arguments. Also, it's just an essay, not policy, but issues like this make me think of WP:FART. Tepkunset (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2025 (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.

Slaveco.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A MySpace band that never released an album. Had several notable members that were in SNFU, but Slaveco. is only mentioned in sources as a minor, failed side-step to that project. There are literally no sources that focus on the band as an independent, notable entity. Why? I Ask (talk) 19:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With apologies for repeating myself from last edit summary, the band is discussed in multiple WP:RSes -- including two books and a documentary, cited in the article -- and hence seems to pass criterion #1 of WP:BAND. Given this, the information is noteworthy; and it furthermore does not belong in the SNFU article, since this would bloat that article; hence, I submit that it needs its own article. Relatedly, I'm not convinced that the term "MySpace band" means very much or is as damning as I take the usage to imply, since numerous bands great and small from the aughts had MySpace accounts. But I understand the editor's concerns and maybe we can see what others think. In any case, I vote keep. CCS81 (talk) 19:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Two books by the same author and a documentary that all mention it briefly as one of Ken Chinn's small projects (along with The Wongs and Little Joe that also don't have articles). MySpace band refers to the fact that when I found the article, it still had a MySpace link (which relates to the essay WP:MYSPACEBAND). Why? I Ask (talk) 20:26, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand, but the "WP:MYSPACEBAND" joke article seems to imply that this term refers primarily to self-generated content, e.g., about one's own non-noteworthy garage band, as evidenced by the proliferation of the term "your" throughout the joke article. There is no such content in the Slaveco. article. Hence, I don't see the relevance of WP:MYSPACEBAND to the Slaveco. article, deleted dead MySpace link not withstanding. Better would be to defer to WP:BAND and the criteria for notability described there. CCS81 (talk) 20:53, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let me lay this out for all our sakes. Here are the statements in favor of deletion, as far as I can tell, and my responses:

Slaveco. is a WP:MYSPACEBAND. This, I think, is false, since the article seems to imply that this term is for band articles with self-generated content, which is not the case for Slaveco.
Slaveco. never released a record. This is true but insufficient for deletion, because WP:BAND specifies criteria for inclusion other than releasing albums.
Slaveco. is only minimally treated in the WP:RSes. This seems to be what is worth discussing. Slaveco. is the subject of one ten-page chapter (Chapter 12, pages 196-206) of Walter 2020, which is a 17-chapter book. There is further discussion in Walter 2024, but it only spans about five pages. The editor in favor of deletion seems to suggest that this is insufficient for C1 of WP:BAND, whereas my argument is that it is significant coverage that is independently noteworthy and would be too bulky to fold into the SNFU article or articles about any of the individual members. On this, I think, the discussion should be focused. I hope this is helpful. CCS81 (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and Canada. Why? I Ask (talk) 19:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The existing sources in the article, particularly the chapter Chris Walter's book, plus the following, are enough to establish notability per WP:GNG.

"Slaveco prepared to slay 'em". Nelson Daily News. 2004-04-22. p. 3. ProQuest 357444111.
PD (2004-04-15). "Mr. Pig stuff". Vue Weekly (443): 23.
Williams, Rob (2004-04-15). "Pig business: SNFU chief Chi branches out in Slaveco enterprise". The Winnipeg Sun. p. 61.

Jfire (talk) 01:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for finding these sources. I personally am still in favor of deletion because of WP:SUSTAINED. A few concert announcements from the same month don't do it for me. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Can this not just be redirected/merged to a section under SNFU or Ken Chinn? I doubt anyone is going to care about a band that simply toured for a year outside of its relationship to those two. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are two other notable members with their own articles, so I don't think it's right to imply that no one else is going to care other than those reading about Chinn or SNFU. I'm also not sure what the rationale for deletion is given that it passes WP:GNG. I see lots of "subjective" language ("I doubt...", "don't do it for me",) but can't see the rationale from the perspective of guidelines for inclusion in Wikipedia. Maybe others have thoughts. CCS81 (talk) 23:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:25, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Local band that never released an album, nor did much of anything else required for notability here. No charted singles, no TV appearances, nor much media coverage beyond the local level. Oaktree b (talk) 22:33, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Brar

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unable to satisfy WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage. B-Factor (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and India. B-Factor (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable singer, going viral isn't the level of notability we need. [17] is an interview. Source 3 in the article is a list of many people, not mostly about this person. I don't see enough for notability at this time. Oaktree b (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
going viral is a context, hitting the charts across multiple countries is notability as defined by the notability guidenlines for Wikipedia Music pages. Wikpedia Music Guidelines notability also defines the release by a major record label as the current case is. There are more sources added by other users as well. G4gurpreet (talk) 09:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't guarantee notability, it's a sign the person could be notable. The Spotify charts aren't ones we use for notability and there is no other sourcing for any sort of charting... We can't use any of these. Oaktree b (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found a source from The Times of India, but I'm not sure if it helps. Aona1212 (talk) 13:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:24, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Krishna McKenzie

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does not appear to meet WP:NBIO from a Google search and so should be deleted or redirected to Samayal Express. Sahaib (talk) 19:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This article is a stub being expanded. Google News has credible sources. The individual's notability does not exclusively come from Samayal Express, thus should not be redirected there. EelamStyleZ (talk) 19:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Television, Tamil Nadu, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, I apologise for violating WP:NPPHOUR, I am new to the job and was a bit too eager to reduce the backlog. Sahaib (talk) 20:49, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think the article should be kept? Geschichte (talk) 07:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Clearly, this would benefit from a bit more input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not an expert in Indian sources...can someone comment on these? It looks like this person may just barely get over the hump if the sources are actually reliable, but I know a some Indian media include paid content that appears to be actual journalism. Valereee (talk) 18:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ram Krishna Bantawa

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV as per Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!}. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Hong Kong, and Nepal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rahmatula786,

I hope this message finds you well.

Thank you for raising concerns about the article on Ram Krishna Bantawa. I firmly believe the article meets the requirements outlined in Wikipedia’s WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV guidelines. Below is an explanation supporting this assertion:

Notability as an Author (WP:NAUTHOR):

Ram Krishna Bantawa is a recognized author and lyricist in Nepali literature. He is known for his novel Saghan Tuwanlo (Shrill Mist) and novel Amalai Chithi (Letter to Mother-whose English translation is forthcoming.) His work has made a significant cultural impact, particularly within the Nepali community.
His lyrics and songs are available on platforms such as YouTube.
Saghan Tuwanlo is included in the curriculum of Tribhuvan University, highlighting its academic and cultural significance.His novels address meaningful societal issues such as women’s rights, untouchability, and Sati Pratha (the practice of widow immolation), further emphasizing his contributions to literature and social discourse.

Significant Coverage (WP:SIGCOV):

Independent and reliable media outlets, including Kantipur, Annapurna Post, and various Hong Kong-based Nepali newspapers, have provided coverage of Bantawa’s work. This demonstrates his influence in Nepali literature and music.
He has been featured in interviews and podcasts that delve into his life, literary contributions, and societal impact, providing further evidence of significant independent coverage.
Bantawa has received several awards and certificates from reputable organizations, including:Nepalese Literary Academy Hong Kong , Heavenly Path Hong Kong , Charu Sahitya Pratisthan , Hong Kong Nepalese Federation , Lyricist Association of Nepal

The article references independent and verifiable sources that discuss Ram Krishna Bantawa’s work in detail. Taken collectively, these factors satisfy the standards for inclusion in Wikipedia under WP:NAUTHOR and WP:SIGCOV.

If additional information or sources are required to further support this assertion and enhance the article, I would be happy to assist.

Best regards, Rasilshrestha (talk) 09:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel you know the person very well so you are aware of so many information. When i search on internet , I hardly find anything of significance covered in reputable media outlet about him .

regarding references, plz go through all the references, and let me know if a single source in reputable Nepali media from NPOV meeting WP criteria. If your have such sources plz put it here other than what you have kept in references. Plz note that sources in reference are not of significance. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rahmatula786,

Thank you for your message. I want to clarify that I do not personally know the person. The information I’ve provided is based solely on my research.

I understand your concerns regarding the importance of meeting Wikipedia's notability criteria. Unfortunately, there is limited online information due to the lack of archived articles in Nepali media. However, I have collected pictures of old newspaper articles about the author, including coverage from Nepali Hong Kong newspapers during a book launch press meet.

I believe the article is written from a neutral point of view. While I cannot attach the offline sources here, I’d be happy to share them via email. Additionally, I can provide relevant YouTube(https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Ram+Krishna+Bantawa) links of his Songs, Interviews. Please let me know how you’d like to proceed.

I look forward to your guidance and support, as I am currently gathering resources and information for my next article of Nepali Singer "Kuma Sagar" . Your insights will be invaluable in helping me refine my work. Please let me know how best to proceed.

Best Regards, Rasilshrestha (talk) 07:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia's guidelines, contributors are discouraged from writing about individuals they personally know to maintain neutrality and avoid conflicts of interest. I can assure you that I have no personal connection with, nor do I know, the author.

In my case, I refrained from including details about the author's awards and certificates, as I was unsure about their accuracy and could not verify them through reliable sources all i had were photographs of certificates and some mentions in newspapers. However, I conducted thorough research and included information about the author's books, song lyrics, and album, as these are well-documented and publicly available.

I can provide you with ISBN of the books they were published through Sajha Publications and ASIA 2000 Ltd. Also you can search in youtube for his songs and interviews. I can additionally provide you with offline sources(Newspaper Articles, Magazines) relating to the author. Rasilshrestha (talk) 15:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there appears to be some sourcing not available easily online (the "surface" of the Internet). I'm going for a dive. Bearian (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I searched under three different names for this author and his book, Shrill Mist. I also reached out to a Nepalese friend. I've come up with zero reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 02:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

Thank you for letting me know.I am actively working on gathering reliable links and additional information to support it. I’ll share them in refrence of the article.

The reason your friend might not have found information about the novel could be because it is an older work, first published in 2008. The author is not as widely recognized as prominent Nepali literary figures like Parijat, Laxmi Prasad Devkota, or Bhanubhakta Acharya, whose biographies are included in school curriculum. Additionally, the novel hasn’t been published online, limiting its accessibility to a broader audience. However, I’ve heard that the author’s new book is being published or translated into English, which might bring more attention to their work.

It’s also worth noting that the author has spent a significant amount of time outside Nepal, particularly in Hong Kong. If you search for his name on YouTube, you’ll find his songs, which might provide some additional context.

For now, I can provide the ISBN number of the book or any other available details. I’m actively working on finding more reliable sources and digging through news archives to provide further information Rasilshrestha (talk) 03:04, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I have posted the photos of news archive i have clicked (Ram Krishna Bantawa News Articles : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive) in archive.org Rasilshrestha (talk) 17:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the link to external site as Ram Krishna Bantawa News Archive. Rasilshrestha (talk) 18:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is an unbolded Keep here and a previous visit to AFD which means that Soft Deletion is not an option. It usually all comes down to sources so a source analysis of what is present in the article would be helpful at this point.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment.

Ref 1 : non neutral source ( media with no reputation has review of some book not a notable work , no findings on search on internet )

Ref 2 & 3 - not active link, neither found on google

Ref 4 - not at all a media of even minor entity

Ref 5&6 - he attends book inauguration program ( that’s all . Just his name mentioned)

Ref 7. Controversial piece about some legal issues being taken. Doesn’t support the article in any sense.

Rest sources - all are either repetition of above news or your tube material or some small contributions not covered in any genuine source. Rahmatula786 (talk) 15:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added Ram Krishna Bantawa News Archive in external Links. They consist of photographs from old newspaper(offline Source). Rasilshrestha (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From what i heard, his book "Aamalai Chitthi" is currently being translated and is expected to be published soon. Once it becomes available, I believe I will be able to provide you with more relevant online sources for further reference. Rasilshrestha (talk) 14:45, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as there is now clear evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources newspapers as shown in the news archive link mentioned above in the external links section of the article. Passes WP:GNG in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - COI - looking at the Archies i wonder how so much personal info (like old newspapers copies) and he is planning to make an English version of some book , can be gathered unless editor knows and have approach with the subject. Recent update in the article also describes the same thing. Nothing but a Desperate attempt.Rahmatula786 (talk) 04:15, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

I appreciate your concern, but as I mentioned earlier, I have photographs of offline sources that I have used for my research. Regarding the English translation, it is based on news related to Aamalai Chitthi (https://annapurnapost.com/story/451773/), where the translator Devi Panthi has spoken about it.

I assure you, this is not a desperate attempt, If it were, I would have included additional details of the author. Instead, my article focuses primarily on the subject's songs, novels, and books that he has written. For example, I have read Shrill Mist and am currently reading another work. The song I referenced is also publicly available on YouTube.

Thank you for understanding, and I hope this clarifies any confusion. Rasilshrestha (talk) 05:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How did u get all photographs , newspaper cuts , u kept in archives. What kind of research ur doing on him, can u clarify. Rahmatula786 (talk) 05:23, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I collected photographs from various sources, including a news archive where old newspapers are stacked. Unfortunately, I couldn’t obtain any materials from Gorkhapatra, as they dont allow. Some of the newspapers I used were already in my possession at home, while others were gathered during my visit to a book launch event.

The event was held to celebrate the author’s return from Hong Kong and his book launch. It featured displays of certificates for his awards and documents with official letterheads. However, I chose not to mention these certificates or documents in my article, as I wasn’t entirely certain about their authenticity or relevance Rasilshrestha (talk) 06:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you are related with him, how come you find or keen to find those stuff. Have you ever done such efforts to make any other article in Wikipedia. So far i can see , you are here just to make this article. If ur a genuine editor. You might have participated in various other articles, agenda . Did you understand it now. U have altogether 63 edits and almost all for this article only since May 5. That clearly shows what you are looking for . I guess u will come with some other explanations. Rahmatula786 (talk) 10:20, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

Thank you for your concern. I’m currently a student in my final year, and I have a deep interest in Nepali literature, arts, and culture, especially Newar traditions and history, as I am a Newar myself. I also enjoy learning about historical topics and sharing knowledge.

I want to clarify that I am not connected to the author mentioned in the article, nor am I being paid for my contributions. If this were a paid effort, I believe the author would have hired someone more experienced than me. As a newcomer to Wikipedia, I am still learning and this article has been my starting point.

I plan to work on more articles in the future and am currently gathering resources for my next article as i have already mentioned earlier. Regarding the current article, my intent has been to present information in a neutral tone. If I were biased or paid, my contributions would likely reflect that, but I have strived to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Wikipedia encourages contributors to improve content where they can, and I believe my contributions are consistent with this principle.

While it’s true that I haven’t contributed extensively to other articles yet, everyone starts somewhere. My current focus on this article does not diminish my genuine intention to support Wikipedia’s mission of providing accurate, unbiased information.

If you have specific concerns about my edits, I’d be happy to discuss and address them transparently. I value constructive feedback and aim to contribute positively to the platform. Rasilshrestha (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your explanation doesn’t justify how you gathered all those photos and newspapers pieces put in archives . Anyway i leave it for now. And want to see how other editors put their views. Rahmatula786 (talk) 14:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,

I respect your concerns and your efforts to make Wikipedia a reliable and comprehensive source of information for everyone. As a newcomer, I would greatly value your feedback on how I can improve my article. Could you please guide me on how to make it more effective? Also, do you think there are any changes I should consider?

Thank you for your time and assistance in advance. I truly appreciate your support and feedback. Rasilshrestha (talk) 04:40, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glokk40Spaz

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Laun chba ller 01:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -Charitably it is too soon. In his first AfD about a year ago, he got one "weak keep" vote because he is signed to Columbia Records, but that is not enough. He is listed at the company website: [18], but with no supporting info ("Read More" leads nowhere). I can find no information from the label about any promotion of his releases or if they even released anything by him yet, despite what this article says. Meanwhile, he has no coverage in reliable music media and his stuff remains self-released on the usual platforms. Good luck to him if that big label puts in some effort, but nothing has yet happened to generate material for an article here. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've found some coverage in reliable sources: [19][20][21][22]. Still not sure if it's enough to meet WP:MUSICBIO though. मल्ल (talk) 19:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already brought to AFD. not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support out there for Deletion. It would also be nice to get another review of sources recently brought to this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - the HipHopDX and HNHH sources make this scrape past GNG. SK2242 (talk) 07:21, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Proposed deletions

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

References

[1] ttps://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pioneering

[1]