Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toggo

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. Cirt (talk) 06:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Toggo

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

I don't think the subject meets the notability requirements as either a musician or an author. I did PROD it before but it was contested citing his writing and an article about his band. Thinking maybe that I had been too harsh in PRODing it, I tried tidying it up but I wasn't finding RS references so I changed my mind again and brought it here. Without RS sources, I can't see how we can get a verifiable article out of it. He has an article on the Norwegian Wikipedia but that is an unreferenced stub and hence offers no help.

The subject was in a band which does not seem to be very notable. It had one EP/mini-album. His writing to date seems to consist of a short section in a book featuring many authors. He is working on a full book, which might make him more notable if it is published, and gets attention, however that is speculative and there is no indication of a publisher that I can see.

My partial tidy up has removed some content, most of it trivia that would not help its case, however if you would prefer to judge it by its full, previous state then here it is. DanielRigal (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —DanielRigal (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. —DanielRigal (talk) 10:58, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. —DanielRigal (talk) 10:58, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 01:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because of the lack of reliable sources. ~ DC (Talk|Edits) 01:57, 5 January 2010 (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.