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

Liz Lamere

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

Lack of independant notability. Most refs are about Alan Vega. TheLongTone (talk) 13:36, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 14:00, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — Liz Lamere clearly meets Wikipedia’s notability standards as a musician, producer, and author with significant, sustained coverage in multiple independent and reliable sources, including Rolling Stone, The New York Times, Pitchfork, and Magnet Magazine. Her career spans over three decades, during which she co-produced three posthumous Alan Vega albums — It, Mutator, and Insurrection — all covered in major media outlets. Lamere has released two solo albums on In The Red Records and co-authored Infinite Dreams: The Life of Alan Vega, a professionally published biography featuring a foreword by Bruce Springsteen. Her work has received independent attention beyond her association with Vega, and the article is supported by 17 citations from high-quality sources. This is clearly more than trivial or incidental notability. Cannery Row (talk) 14:58, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Katelyn MacDonald

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

This article seems to be a classic WP:BLP1E; this individual received a burst of viral notability over a couple days in June 2024 for the bell-ringing video. I can't find any independent coverage since that burst of coverage; the only coverage I can find at all is an article from Duke, which is a non-independent source since the subject is an employee of the university chapel. Given that all three provisions of BLP1E are met (the reliable sources cover the person only in relation to a single event, the event itself is non-notable, and the subject remains a low-profile individual), this subject fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Christianity, and North Carolina. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Duke Memorial United Methodist Church#Building. Since the viral bell ringing is more interesting as a part of the church history, and the notability standards are not so high, I propose a merge and redirect. A condensed version of the lead as a standalone paragraph at the end of the section and a single source will suffice. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 19:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure this one-time viral video incident is WP:DUE on that page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete not every viral video needs its own article, see WP:BLP1E. --hroest 20:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Howlin' Ric & The Rocketeers

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

Band doesn't appear to be notable enough, and coverage from reliable sources is clearly lacking. Fails WP:NBAND. CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete can't find any independent sources or signs they might meet notability guidelines. Orange sticker (talk) 09:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Petersens

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

1. Current article cannot be brought up to standard. Current article uses almost entirely links to the band's own website to support the included statements. I have spent several hours looking for non-affiliated, reputable sources, and I do not believe there is significant, meaningful sources about this band that can support this article. All third party sources that I can find rely heavily on what appears to be press materials from the band, interviews with members of the band, or do not have meaningful, in-depth coverage (such as an announcement of a concert). Article appears likely to have been mostly written by individuals connected to band.

2. Band does not meet notability threshold. The nearest criteria that I can find to apply is that they have completed international concert tour, BUT I cannot find "non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources" about the tour. The most significant source I can find is linked from the current article:

The Petersens tour the Emerald Isle, Bluegrass Today, February 12, 2019. "Soulful family band The Petersens set for Whangārei, Kerikeri shows". NZ Herald.

but coverage is fairly superficial, and this is the only source of this quality that I am able to find. Driftingdrifting (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, and Music. Driftingdrifting (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:09, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there are a few third party sources:
- "The Petersens pluck, pick and play for Thames," NZ newspaper concert review[1]
- "Ellen Peterson, Banjo Idol," profile of band's banjo player in banjo magazine[2]
- "The Petersens wow packed audience at Cache Valley Cowboy Rendezvous", local Utah news site concert review[3]

I'm not super experienced with band notability. They clearly have toured internationally. And there are enough sources to at least create a stub based on reliable sources. Is that enough? --Jahaza (talk) 21:29, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pulling the links. Yeah, there are a third party sources, but I don't think they meet the criteria of "non-trival coverage in independent reliable sources". The coverage is not particularly in depth, and these are fairly small publications. Driftingdrifting (talk) 22:10, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Article is not nearly so unsalvageable as the nominator suggests, and per WP:NEXIST, there are sufficient independent, reliable-source articles on this band and reviews of their LP to pass WP:NMUSIC#1 and WP:GNG. See Northland Age (NZ Herald), Cache Valley Daily, the Valley Profile, and independent reviews of their LP My Ozark Mountain Home in Aleteia and Bluegrass Today. It's slender, but the pass is clear. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - In total agreement with the previous voter. Their reliable media coverage is slim but can still support a stub article. They have been noticed within their distinct niche of the music business. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable group with nearly a million YouTube followers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:48, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

E Reece

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN. Lacks enough SIGCOV sources in independent sources. I only found these reviews [4] and [5]. Searched ProQuest and Google news. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 18:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Kansas. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 18:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dial (band)

AfDs for this article:

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

This article was created by a band member and somehow survived a previous afd. Despite this there doesnt appear to be any reliable sources about the band. GamerPro64 14:42, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Netherlands. GamerPro64 14:42, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to lack of sources. Clearly fails WP:NOTABILITY in its current state.Entranced98 (talk) 16:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Clearly fails WP:BAND Halley ^{luv Filipino ❤} (Talk) 02:42, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:BAND and citation search is not turning up reputable sources. Driftingdrifting (talk) 16:06, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kristoffer Gildenlöw#Career as a viable ATD, also per CHEAP and PRESERVE. The band with lineup is explicitly mentioned at the the target. gidonb (talk) 11:45, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rahmah Pinky

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

No evidence of satisfying the notability guidelines. The references are either dead links or reports of minor details such as changing the company that manages her work, not substantial coverage of her. Searching for better sources was a total failure; it turned up this Wikipedia article, her Facebook account, a site offering downloads of her music, etc, no reliable independent sources. (PROD contested with no reason given. ) JBW (talk) 11:02, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. JBW (talk) 11:02, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uganda-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:29, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:56, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. No RS for notability.Littenberg (talk) 00:11, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shinola (band)

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

I couldn't find sources that were sufficient to pass WP:GNG or WP:BAND. Suonii180 (talk) 10:16, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and North Carolina. Suonii180 (talk) 10:16, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A single critical review in Billboard (magazine) is not sufficient on its own. Please ping me if further sources surface.ResonantDis_tortion 12:32, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails notability unless someone is able to turn up more sources. I was unable to do so myself based on initial search. Driftingdrifting (talk) 16:08, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trampsta

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

Fail to meet GNG and SNG WP:COMPOSER Uncle Bash007 (talk) 06:29, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Uncle Bash007 (talk) 06:29, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Brazil. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:44, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:NMUSIC. Svartner (talk) 03:24, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Something is odd here. Very few press articles, but invited in festivals worldwide and YouTube video have millions of views. While the number of views isn't a criteria per se, it could be valuable to keep this article as a placeholder to answer the question "who's that artist with lot of views?", that was my motivation creating that article. From WP:NMUSIC, could weakly match Has composed a number of notable melodies, tunes, or standards used in a notable music genre.. --Dereckson (talk) 18:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Views on YouTube do not guarantee notability. Svartner (talk) 16:20, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ji Seo-yeon (singer)

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

Failed WP:GNG, WP:NBLP, WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER showing no WP:SIGCOV for individual notability apart from passing mentions from TripleS-related reportings. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and South Korea. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:10, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:40, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to TripleS. As with another recent AfD related to this group, this member does not appear to have individual notability as defined at WP:BANDMEMBER. MidnightMayhem 12:03, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luigi Piccioli

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

clearly fails WP:GNG FMSky (talk) 11:52, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If it's true that Luigi Piccioli taught Peter Tchaikovsky and others including Bogomir Korsov, then deletion would be deeply inappropriate. Even a minimal biography of a teacher of one of the world’s most renowned composers — and of a prominent Russian baritone — is inherently notable. Wikipedia is not harmed by keeping a well-categorized, accurate one-liner on a 19th-century figure who played a role in music history. Deletion, on the other hand, would erase a potentially valuable record. Does it need more? Perhaps. But definitely keep. – Eurodog (talk) 22:12, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. GNG is the standard, but it is not the only path to notability. If a historical figure was a teacher of Tchaikovsky, then notability is almost certainly inherited and documented in musicological sources. I am looking for sources now. But deletion before attempting a minimal improvement seems premature.

For musicians, notability is also addressed in WP:MUSICBIO, which allows inclusion for those “who have made a significant contribution to the development or performance of music.” Teaching Tchaikovsky qualifies. – Eurodog (talk) 22:15, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. FMSky (talk) 11:52, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 14:06, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge & redirect into Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. I've added an WP:RS citation which verifies the subject did indeed teach the composer, and provides a paragraph of text about Piccioli. Assuming no further sources are identified to show independent notability, as an WP:ATD I recommend merge and redirect. ResonantDis_tortion 13:06, 7 June 2025 (UTC) Change to Keep based upon new sourcing sufficient to develop the article more than a stub, and providing a claim per WP:BASIC and also WP:MUSICBIO "significant contribution" per above. ResonantDis_tortion 09:12, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I added more sources to the article, which hopefully will make the article grow in the future. I hope this is not considered source bombing, since the sources are all published biographies of Tchaikovsky and other published books including musician encyclopedias, which I considered worth keeping. It should be noted that the Britannica Encyclopedia [6] has an article about Piccioli. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 21:05, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the multiple reliable sources added to the article that confirm the specific notability discussed above, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Foley Stewart

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

does not meet WP:N FMSky (talk) 08:44, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. FMSky (talk) 08:44, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:45, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:24, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Lacks general notability guidelines, significant coverage and nsinger. Fade258 (talk) 12:26, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Marksmen Quartet

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

Article about a band, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. As always, bands are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they existed, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about them and their music -- but this is completely unreferenced, the only attempts at "referencing" that have ever previously been in the article at all are primary sources (like their own website, YouTube and Spotify) which aren't support for notability, and the article claims absolutely nothing about them that would be "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:08, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

del no independent coverage. --Altenmann >talk 20:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This one was close, I found this and that but I don't think these are enough for GNG and there is nothing to show a pass for NMUSIC. Moritoriko (talk) 04:53, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ylber Idrizi

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG. Lacks significant and published coverage. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 01:36, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Albania, Kosovo, and North Macedonia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:46, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The discography section is entirely unreferenced and the other section is backed by Wikipedia articles in other languages, the subject's own site/YouTube, and other questionable sites. --Local hero ^talk 22:00, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD before so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:22, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Tschuggnall

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

Refbombed promotion for non notable musician. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Has drummed with a lot of projects but lacks independent notability. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:11, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Austria, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:38, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is sufficient significant coverage that satisfies GNG requirements to show the subject's notability as a musician. CresiaBilli (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of multiple throw away boilerplate !votes recently from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:15, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly refrain from duplicating your identical content beneath all my votes and comments.CresiaBilli (talk) 12:10, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: so far, i don't see the significant coverage in indepentent sources to pass gng, at least with what is currently cited in the article. Tschuggnall seems to have co-written a textbook; finding a lot of websites to buy it online, but no in-depth coverage about him. I'll try to find more sources the next days. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - total lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Facebook, his own website, blogs, and sources about other people don't contribute to notability. Bearian (talk) 16:30, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: wasn't able to find independent wp:sigcov of him; almost every piece of online coverage is either passing mentions or not independent. I couldn't assess this paywalled source. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 12:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ripe Banana Skins

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

Seems to fail WP:GNG and WP:NBAND. Did a search per WP:BEFORE and found nothing relevant in news nor books. Google only pops up music host sites. The only sources I found with specific coverage was [7] which reads like an advertisement and [8] which looks like it raises WP:UGC issues. The article is also entirely unsourced and the external links are either dead or were taken over. 🪷 nahida 00:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Paraguay. 🪷 nahida 00:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Was able to find some local coverage on the band, here and here. The band still seems to be active; most of the coverage seems trivial, however, and I'm not sure if it passes WP:NM. They did win a prize from the Argentine Film Critics Association for a movie's soundtrack they made. Coeusin (talk) 01:43, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This might be relevant as well. Coeusin (talk) 01:46, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:46, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Williams (musician)

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

Fails WP:BANDMEMBER, should be merged and redirected to The Devil Wears Prada (band). guninvalid (talk) 03:16, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Dave Shapiro has also been nominated for merging. guninvalid (talk) 03:18, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, California, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Draftify or~~ weak keep: Upon viewing the article it appears there is a bit more here than on Dave Shapiro in regards to arguments for keeping it. 15/23 articles are in relation to the crash. This may not be enough to qualify WP:BIO1E. I would vote to draftify, expand with more non-crash related references if possible and potentially submit to WP:AfC. If not, I would not oppose to a weak keep at this stage, subject to reading more experienced editors opinions. (Having said all that. WP:BANDMEMBER as OP says would say to redirect, but I'll stick to my initial vote despite this). 11wallisb (talk) 06:55, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Edit on 08/06/22 after relisting: I have changed my vote to weak keep which I originally put as an alternative vote at initial listing. My reasoning is in line with what I said previously, I believe there is just enough in the article for it to be kept. 11WB (talk) 12:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:26, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article is reasonably well-sourced with independent coverage that provides substantive biographical details about Daniel Williams. While WP:BANDMEMBER is a useful guideline, it is not a strict requirement, especially when WP:GNG can be met independently. There is evidence of coverage beyond trivial mentions, and the article is not a mere coatrack. WP:NOTPAPER reminds us that the threshold for inclusion is not limited by space constraints, and WP:IAR allows for flexibility when strict application of a guideline would hinder the encyclopedia’s goal of sharing verifiable knowledge. Merging to the band article would likely result in the loss of meaningful detail specific to Williams’ contributions and post-TDWP activity. TrueCRaysball ^💬|✏️ 00:45, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your point on WP:NOTPAPER. I find preference to keeping articles than outright deleting them. If an article can be sent back to draft and improved there, that is always preferable to just deletion. 11wallisb (talk) 15:59, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that there's very little extra content on Williams himself other than his death and a brief discussion of interests. There's really no reason that can't also be merged into the Band article, and it's also trivial enough that it's not worth keeping, as I see it. guninvalid (talk) 19:24, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Guninvalid I think both points are definitely valid. Personally, I believe Williams' article should be kept over Dave Shapiro as there seems to be more on him. 11wallisb (talk) 21:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I see equal arguments for Draftifying, Merging and Keeping so I'm relisting this discussion for another week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Shapiro (music agent)

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

Fails WP:BANDMEMBER, should be merged and redirected to The Devil Wears Prada (band). guninvalid (talk) 03:17, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. guninvalid (talk) 03:17, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Daniel Williams has also been nominated for merging. guninvalid (talk) 03:19, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Alaska, California, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:34, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Aviation. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect at the moment: I think I agree with the OP on this one. I feel as though this one may fall under WP:BIO1E? My reasoning being upon inspecting the references, many cover the 2025 San Diego Cessna Citation II crash in which he was tragically involved (19 of the 22 references). This is only upon initial inspection however and I would be interested to see others' points of view on this. For now I concur with OP and think a redirect with coverage on a relevant page would probably suffice. 11wallisb (talk) 06:32, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe a merge/redirect to the page of the band Count the Stars would be most appropriate. My reasoning for this rather than the OP's suggestion is that there is no definitive evidence Shapiro had any link to TDWP other than the crash. As Shapiro was a founding member of Count the Stars, this to me makes sense as the most appropriate choice for merge/redirection. 11WB (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t find any relation between him and the band other than him dying in the same event as Daniel Williams, who was a former member of said band. 2600:1004:B347:4AE1:3C78:5FC1:1294:B927 (talk) 12:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a valid point if correct. A brief scroll of Google seems to back this up. It appears Dave Shapiro was a music agent/executive, but not of TDWP. In my post above for this reason, I only stated to redirect to a relevant page and not specifically to the article for TDWP. This may have been an oversight by the OP, however I think the point to redirect elsewhere stands on its own regardless. 11wallisb (talk) 13:25, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was intending this to be a reply to guninvalid’s comment because he said that Dave Shapiro should be merged with T.D.W.P. 2600:1004:B33F:699D:C81D:4C36:8E3F:4FB5 (talk) 02:37, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, they will be able to see these messages! 11WB (talk) 07:47, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. While we have a rough consensus to Merge/Redirect, we have two different target articles suggested and we have to get that down to ONE.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I know almost nothing about Shapiro so I am fine with @11wallisb's suggestion of redirecting to Count the Stars. Parts of this bio can be merged into both articles anyway, but since there can only be one redirect, I'm okay with that being Count the Stars. guninvalid (talk) 08:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. The only reason my redirect article differed is because Shapiro has no searchable link to TDWP (other than the crash). 11WB (talk) 08:31, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So This Is Suffering

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

Plenty of sources, but no sigcov. Several consist solely of press releases and there's a lot of coverage from blogs, but nothing that meets GNG criteria, and they do not appear to qualify for any WP:NBAND criteria. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. Shellwood (talk) 17:20, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 19:16, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will Crewdson

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

This guitarist fails WP:NBIO with no coverage in independent reliable secondary sources. Previous prod has been contested by IP 2.96.203.211 at WP:REFUND. GTrang (talk) 21:20, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:27, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there are more substantial independent references (ie not interviews or put out as press releases) online now. There are these: https://usrockermusic.com/2017/07/06/a-redwood-weekend-the-glam-skanks-will-crewdson-the-sloths-and-the-schizophonics-rip-it-up-in-dtla/ https://freshonthenet.co.uk/2014/10/mixtape20141013/ https://totalrock.com/rachel-stamp-live-at-the-02-islington-glam-punk-rock-at-its-finest/ Also not very substantial coverage at https://bigtakeover.com/concerts/AdamAntVicTheatreChicagoILSeptember72019 and https://usrockermusic.com/2024/05/09/adam-ant-and-the-english-beat-give-lessons-in-showmanship-at-the-greek-in-la/ Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:25, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Will Crewdson has some reliable coverage from independent music outlets like US Rocker Music and Fresh on the Net. These sources, while not mainstream, provide significant coverage to meet WP:NBIO.Primpzetad (talk) 10:59, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. There is support for Keeping this article but a source analysis would be useful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This guitarist meets WP:GNG backed with significant coverage in multiple reliable sources.CresiaBilli (talk) 07:25, 7 June 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. ✗plicit 14:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Edwards (Australian composer)

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

This Article relies so much on unreliable sources and no improvement have been made, I was thinking I could find a source with independent coverage but I couldn’t find, The subject has contributed in many field of entertainment yet fails to have WP:SIGCOV, fails WP:MUSICBIO, fails WP:GNG per no particularly article that speaks about him independently on multiple secondary sources, most of the citations are either usercreated space under a music website where he has listed his musical works. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 12:08, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 12:08, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television, Theatre, Advertising, Germany, England, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:51, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:58, 6 June 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.

Connie (freestyle singer)

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

No indication of notability per WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, or WP:NMUSIC. I looked for any signficant discussion of this singer in reliable, third party sources but could not find anything, only social media, YouTube, etc. ... discospinster _talk 19:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Florida. ... discospinster _talk 19:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:42, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Potentially notable in my view, but a very tricky subject to search for sources, particularly with an album Connie by Connie. However the subject did have a single in the Billboard charts Funky Little Beat #44 & [9]. Allmusic has WP:RSMUSIC staff writer coverage [10] and [11]. There are also some further critical coverage/mentions in the worldradiohistory archive such as [12], [13] & [14]. ResonantDis_tortion 11:12, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the subject did have a hit in the Billboard charts, "Funky Little Beat" as mentioned. The song itself is notable. And as mentioned, Allmusic has RS coverage of Connie. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 18:25, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 00:34, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep if there are more sources. Wynwick55gl (talk) 09:02, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Randall Smith (composer)

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

Fifteen years after being tagged as a possible COI BLP with insufficient sourcing, this article still contains no reliable sources. A Google search turns up nothing of note for me, either. BD2412 T 02:36, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. BD2412 T 02:36, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:31, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously at AFD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:40, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I thought that Allmusic was a reliable source if it had a byline. As I've written numerous times before on AfD, an autobiography tends to have both original research and censorship issues. What do folks think about this particular case? Bearian (talk) 19:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearian: I don't think this article has enough substance to have those sorts of issues. It has a single short sentence on the subject itself, and the rest is a directory of works which are themselves non-notable. Allmusic may be reliable to show something exists, but it's not a source for notability of its topics, since it purports to cover "all" music, however trivial that may be. BD2412 T 00:05, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, in terms of staff written biographies of music artists AllMusic despite it's name is more selective than Wikipedia. For example, most of the artists listed in this deletion topic of bands and musicians do not have bios on AllMusic, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:27, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would still not say that having an AllMusic staff-written bio, as the only source outside one music magazine review and the artist's own website, suffices for Wikipedia notability. BD2412 T 22:49, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An Allmusic staff bio (and/or staff review) does count towards notability, but would not be sufficient on its own. Further to the AM bio and magazine review cited in the article, the subject also has critical reviews here and here; however I do not have sufficient familiarity with the genre to robustly conclude whether these are reliable or polished blogs, though the expose.org site does appear to have an editorial policy and has graduated from a print magazine, which is a positive sign. ResonantDis_tortion 23:19, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the above discussion. Thank you for addressing my concerns. Bearian (talk) 00:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Bickerton

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

I could not find any evidence that this is a notable musician, seems to be a self-published artist who hasn't received significant attention from reliable sources so far. Fram (talk) 13:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Fram (talk) 13:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is not true if you search and read about Alucidnation which is his Allias, you will find alot of refernces and articles about him. he has also appeared on the Grand Theft Auto IV game sound track. i have seen many articles on Wikipedia about music producers who hardly have any credbility compared to this producer. please do your research. i also have added more links to this producer. Manunited20 (talk) 13:56, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend you identify better sources and add them to the article to demonstrate the subject meets WP:MUSICBIO notability criteria. As a general rule at least WP:THREE are recommended. To assist - I have identified two EP reviews from a reliable source (Muzik): 2001 and 2003. There is also an Irish Times album review on ProQuest 309867414. ~~I !vote Draftify as there is potential here.~~ ResonantDis_tortion 15:39, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for assisting, i have added the sources on the discography of the artist. if you can identify more reliable sources and help edit the page in any way, that would be appreciated. Manunited20 (talk) 04:29, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The release blurbs in Muzik help towards establishing notability, but a lot of the current references do not. If notable, no need to put into draft purgatory, just add more sources in reliable publications if they exist.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 14:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 04:26, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I Have just added a reliable newspaper source i found in archives and few magazine sources in which his track was also featured in a movie. please check recent edits. there is more about the aritst in mucial archives. it just needs more research.Manunited20 (talk) 13:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as I've written in countless AfDs, producers are not only not automatically notable, but are run of the mill. We are not MySpace. Bearian (talk) 19:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: you are talking nonsense.That means we should remove every Record producers page on wikipedia. The producer has multiple reliable sources now. The page needs more work but should remain on wikipedia.Manunited20 (talk) 1:27, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Please read WP:NPA. The new sources appear to be passing mentions and listings. If there is nothing further available, beyond what I identified above, then I update my !vote to Delete. ResonantDis_tortion 09:08, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are just being a follower of someone else’s words. If that makes you sleep then 👍😂 Manunited20 (talk) 10:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sinai 48

AfDs for this article:

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

Fifteen years after being tagged for possible COI, this article still has not a single proper reference showing notability independent of the notability of certain members, and there does not appear to be one to be found. BD2412 T 16:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 16:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. IdanST (talk) 08:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 17:18, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umair (music producer)

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN. At first glance there appears to be significant coverage but looking closer you will see that most are not bylined, are from unreliable sources, or just routine coverage or mentions. CNMall41 (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Umair meets WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. His 2024 album Rockstar Without a Guitar peaked at #8 on Spotify Pakistan and was featured in Genius Community’s 25 Best Albums of 2024 (ThePrint). His single “Asli Hai” topped YouTube Pakistan charts (Music Metrics Vault). Covered by reliable sources like Samaa TV, ThePrint, Wordplay Magazine, and Itz Hip Hop. Producer for notable duo Young Stunners. Meets NMUSIC via charting work, media coverage, and national significance.

— Behappyyar (talk) 15:41, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NMUSICIAN would not be met based on charting. Spotify and YouTube are not acceptable under WP:CHART. Also, being a producer for someone notable does not come with inherent notability. Can you address the non-bylined references? Do you feel these are reliable and if so how? For WP:GNG, you are also cited press releases above which can never be used for notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 While it’s true that WP:CHART places limits on YouTube/Spotify data for standalone notability, those indicators support broader cultural relevance under WP:NMUSIC#1 and WP:GNG. Chart placements help demonstrate impact in the absence of traditional charts in South Asia, where mainstream media often lags behind independent or digital-first musicians.

Regarding sources:

Samaa TV and ThePrint are independent, professional outlets with editorial oversight and journalistic standards. These are not self-published or fan-driven and are widely accepted as RS in other music-related AfDs.
The Itz Hip Hop review is bylined and analytical, not promotional; it contains critical assessment of Umair’s production and album structure.
The Wordplay Magazine article, while regional, is independent and contains critical evaluation — see similar RS used in AfDs for artists in UK/India-Pak context.

I accept that the ANI press release cannot count toward WP:GNG, but it was cited for factual support of chart placements, not to satisfy notability directly.

Notability isn’t only about headlining credits. Umair is the primary producer behind Rebirth and Open Letter, two of the most discussed hip-hop albums in Pakistan — both critically reviewed in RS and recognized in independent retrospectives. His influence is creative and structural, meeting WP:NMUSIC#2 (“significant contribution to the work of others that is covered in reliable sources”).

On balance, the article meets WP:GNG through multiple independent sources with critical commentary, and WP:NMUSIC through documented production of notable albums and influence on Pakistan’s hip-hop scene.

— Behappyyar (talk) 06:45, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Playing a major role in major works proves notability. Could you give more info on the part he played and on the notability of those albums? — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not to forget: Talha Anjum's most famous song Kaun Talha? in which he diss an Indian rapper Naezy was produced by Umair. ^[1] Behappyyar (talk) 15:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@(Itzcuauhtli11) He served as the lead producer and co-composer on both Rebirth (2017) and Open Letter (2023), two landmark Urdu hip-hop albums in Pakistan.

On Rebirth, Umair produced all 15 tracks for Young Stunners, a duo considered foundational to Pakistani rap. The album is credited with shaping the Urdu hip-hop scene and received wide media attention from outlets like SAMAA TV.^[2]

For Open Letter, he was again the key producer, collaborating with Talha Anjum and international names such as KRSNA. The album was reviewed independently and discussed critically within South Asian music forums.^[3]^[4]

These albums are not just popular but culturally significant, marking key points in the evolution of Pakistani hip-hop. Umair’s complete production involvement and critical coverage of these albums demonstrate a major creative role in notable works, satisfying WP:NMUSIC#2 and strengthening his case under WP:GNG. ^[5]

References

^ "Indian rapper asks 'Talha Kaun?', Talha Anjum responds with a brutal diss track". Images.Dawn.com. Dawn Media Group. 21 May 2025. Retrieved 23 May 2025.
^ "Young Stunners' new Album Rebirth is a must listen". Samaa TV.
^ "Open Letter - Talha Anjum [Album Review]".
^ "Open Letter Talha Anjum's album blend of hip-hop and Urdu poetry".
^ "Umair and Jokhay The man behind the rise of Talha Anjum amd Talha Younas".

There is a huge WP:WALLOFTEXT so I will only be addressing some of the main points. I wouldn't consider Young Stunners even notable despite having a Wikipedia page (that one needs to go to AfD as well). A single collaboration with a rapper is not something that gains inherent notability. Everything else is more of an WP:ILIKEIT argument. As far as the "landmark" albums you speak of, I would guess they would have enough coverage to warrant a Wikipedia page since they are landmark, yet I do not see it. Fact is, the coverage has some mentions, routine announcements, and unreliable sources (even a publication that is reliable like Dawn can have specific articles considered unreliable - see WP:NEWSORGINDIA). The rest of what you cited is not reliable (two blogs and Reddit?). If this artist was truly worthy of notice (a requirement of notability), there would be more than blog posts and promotional churnalism. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41 This isn’t WP:ILIKEIT—his notability stems from his influence on multiple notable works. While some early coverage may be light or promotional, there is independent, reliable coverage (e.g., SAMAA TV, The Express Tribune, and Dawn articles/interviews) highlighting Umair’s production role. [15]. Behappyyar (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The comment proves what I have been saying. You cite this which is a routine announcement and not-bylined. It is not reliable for the purpose of establishing notability. It is the same concept as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Finally, please do not cite interviews anymore. They are not independent and cannot be used to establish notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The link i have shared Umair slides into Genius Top Albums of the Year is not a routine announcement. It highlights Umair’s recognition by Genius alongside global artists like Beyoncé. This editorial coverage by a reliable source (The Express Tribune) goes beyond routine mentions and supports notability per WP:GNG. Behappyyar (talk) 19:12, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Already stated numerous times. It is NOT BYLINED and falls under similar concerns as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Articles published under "news desk" or "webdesk" have consistently found to be unreliable for notability purposes as they are promotional churnalism, not something in-depth written by a journalist. Please see WP:CIR. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:48, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: would benefit from additional input. Contributors are also reminded to please refrain from using LLMs to generate walls of text, as they don't help anyone. Write your own arguments, please.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete: I lean to agree with CNMall41; most of the articles with SIGCOV doesn't mention the author of the article, and all of them have promotional undertones. The Rolling Stones review is nice, checks all the boxes for a good sources (except the promotional vibes). If we can find another 2+ sources of the quality of this Rolling Stones article, we can save the article. This source also has a little bit specifically on Umair. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 16:24, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually thought the Rolling Stone reference was okay, but when I looked closer during a WP:BEFORE, I saw it was Rolling Stone India which is not Rolling Stone and has different (if any) oversight authority. Should be treated similar to Forbes India or Entrepreneur India. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:47, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It seems that he meets WP:NSINGER criterion 2, having a single listed on a country's national music chart. 1 190.140.190.217 (talk) 22:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The source that you pointed out states that "As well as several tracks making Spotify’s viral charts in Pakistan and India". Regional Spotify listings do not count towards WP:CHART. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:18, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify to modify sources: Having read the above discussions, read the article over and checked the sources, there are a few things that stand out to me. Firstly, the names of some of the article writers, namely refs 2, 5, 10 and 12, appear to not be the name of an actual person (Images Staff and Culture Haze). These sources are likely not bylined, as I believe has been mentioned previously. Secondly, ref 14 is a link to the artist's Spotify. Whilst Spotify isn't listed on WP:RS/PS, I would question whether it counts as a WP:RS. For these reasons, along with the article still potentially being a WP:Stub (it has the notice at the bottom of the article), I think that draftifying the article to take care of these issues would be beneficial in strengthening arguments for keep. 11WB (talk) 11:18, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@11wallisb The references contain nonsense parameters because this article is AI generated. Sources 4 and 16 contain utm_source=chatgpt.com in the URLs. 86.23.87.130 (talk) 00:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Yes, it appears you are correct for ref 16. That link was attributed by Google Analytics to ChatGPT as a source of traffic. I believe this relates to Wikipedia:AI-generated content - not yet a policy, but important nonetheless. Having seen this and the other things I mentioned previously shifts my opinion from draftify further to deletion pending further insight. 11WB (talk) 00:53, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Further to my last message, it appears ref 20 also links to Spotify. I've re-read the article, I'm still not confident in my own ability to detect LLM usage or other AI generated content, so I think it best I leave that to be confirmed by more experienced Wikipedians. Regardless of AI, this article definitely has issues that need addressing in its current form. 11WB (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nomination. Needs more coverage.

Edard Socceryg (talk) 00:55, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The subject does not meet the notability guidelines regarding WP:NMUSIC. From a glance of the sources in the article, they do not discuss the subject significantly, or are adverts, or are profiles... And I could not find any valid sources on the search engine. I also opposed draftification unless there is a possibility that the subject will be notable in the future. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:01, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gwen (singer)

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

Fails WP:BANDMEMBER, no indication of notability outside of being in her group. orangesclub 🍊 00:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Music, and Philippines. orangesclub 🍊 00:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per my argument to Maloi ROY is WAR Talk! 22:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bini (group): Per my arguments at the Maloi AFD discussion. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 18:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "Gwen (singer)" is an appropriate redirect. There may have been several more notable singers named Gwen that are for more notable. Either this is kept (either as a standalone article or as a redirect assuming info on this article is not there at the main Bini article) or deleted, no redirects. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Second choice is to list this person under Gwen (given name), then redirect Gwen (singer) to Gwen (given name) or have it deleted altogether (will consider WP:RFD on this at a later time). Howard the Duck (talk) 23:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She is passed in WP:GNG given to Maloi as demonstrated the significant coverage of Vogue Philippines and it is technically outside of Bini. She's also a housemate of Pinoy Big Brother: Otso and have importance on that, given to that in the Gwen (singer) § Media image as it is really passed in GNG. This is like a similar of WP:IDONTLIKEIT you just overlooked that her Media image section is obviously have somehow passed in WP:GNG. This is might be another relisting week.ROY is WAR Talk! 00:58, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I love how you use the word "technically" to further emphasize it is indeed connected to Bini (LOL).

We don't create articles on contestants of reality TV shows aolely based on their participation on said shows, either, so I dont know why you'd bring that up. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:28, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am explaining to you that she is passed on WP:GNG together with WP:SIGCOV stating all her featured notable prestigious magazines like Parcinq, Billboard Philippines, and Vogue Philippines. All of them are demonstrating the significant coverage and in-depth on her fashion. You are trying to gaslight the facts and my arguments that she is notable at all. And besides, I noticed that you participating only when have a AfD (not a assumption but a observation) on Maloi and Gwen and given it is a WP:IDONTLIKEIT and SIGCOV is the major criteria of GNG that's why she's passed.

This is a summary for passing significant coverage of Gwen, for participating this AfD)

Billboard Philippines: Gwen was featured on notable magazine of Billboard Philippines where she talks about her life and being a housemate on Pinoy Big Brother: Otso.
Vogue Philippines: She featured also in this notable magazine with her fashion stating of Vogue writer Bianca Custodio describing her Gwen's fashion "60's mod-inspired" and "the girls take a break from their usual image, donning bobbed wigs of varying shapes and cuts."
Parcinq: Parcinq is a Philippine magazine and Gwen was featured in this magazine as a cover pf the magazine. Gwen also shares on her life on this magazine with Parcinq describes the fashion of Gwen as "Black symbolizes death, darkness, and the mysteries of the universe." ROY is WAR Talk! 01:42, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If these are WP:INTERVIEWs then these are most likely fail WP:RS and therefore fail WP:GNG regardless if such activities make her surpass WP:BANDMEMBER. Howard the Duck (talk) 03:22, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. All of them are passed in WP:RS since it was a reliable and have significant coverage with Gwen's fashion with given sources. ROY is WAR Talk! 05:23, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You clearly haven't read WP:INTERVIEW? Even if this person was interviewed by the Times of London about her life and career, it would fail WP:RS. Reliable sources, while also considers who published it, considers how it was created. Interviews arw autobiographical.

With being said, Billboard was indeed an interview, while the other two were fashion editorials with an interview interspersed on it. I can figure fashion editorials can be used as WP:RS if somebody else reports on it. All of these are primary and fails WP:RS.

Again, competence is required. If an article is primarily based on interviews, and on ABS-CBN and Youtube, it has no place here. Howard the Duck (talk) 06:08, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I already read it earlier (LOL). It is clearly passed in WP:RS it is notable magazines like Vogue Philippines and Billboard Philippines they have high credibility on this magazine or company so it is a reliable source and passed on WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV . They are not a "cheap" magazines whatsoever and they are Professionally edited publications, and independent. It is not merely trivial or promotional, it also applied on WP:NBASIC which is passed also. It really matters who publishes it, is it unreliable or not? In this case, Billboard and Vogue and Parcinq are reliable (highly on Billboard and Vogue since they are the top reliable). Also, it is not a uncontroversial claims. The interview are usually primary sources, but when conducted and published by reliable third party sources with highly reputable source, they are acceptable.

Again, this is my last argument on this and it is clearly will go over and over on this, and obviously clearly mentioning ABS-CBN and YouTube, Vogue Billboard PH and ABS-CBN, YouTube are different (LOL). ROY is WAR Talk! 07:25, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not if the source is cheap or not (hence the Times of London analogy); it's whether or not the source is the subject herself. You clearly haven't read WP:INTERVIEW. The closing admin should take notice of willful ignorance of the arguments being presented to you. I guess we won't need another relist. Howard the Duck (talk) 07:39, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:INTERVIEW § Who, what, where Is this a reliable source such as a broadsheet newspaper, respected magazine, reliable broadcaster or news outlet that specializes in interviews? In this case, Billboard PH, Vogue Philippines and Parcinq are reliable.

Also on WP:INTERVIEW, independent or non-independent of the subject matter, it is clearly demonstrate that Billboard PH and Vogue Philippines are independent, this is a most likely a WP: IDONTLIKEIT argument, I gave you all my arguments but you insisting that Billboard and Vogue are not reliable. The issue of "willful ignorance" as might be a attacking me. Is that there's no policy basis for excluding a well sourced, editorially controlled interview published by an RS from notability consideration. This is not applied to Gwen, this is all applied to all musicians also that interview like New York Times, Original Billboard and Original Vogue if you exclude that, half of WP:BIO wouldn't exist. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:48, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter if it's from the Times of London, Vogue Italia, Billboard USA, or Yes Magazine; WP:INTERVIEW#Independence states "The interviewee may or may not be independent of the subject matter. In some cases, the interviewer is also not independent. For example:

Alice Expert talks about herself, her actions, or her ideas: non-independent source."

In other words, a person talking about oneself in any publication or medium (print, TV, internet) fails WP:RS. As per WP:INTERVIEW#Notability: "Anything interviewees say about themselves or their own work is both primary and non-independent, and therefore does not support a claim for notability."

Now, you could argue there may had been some synthesis on those three articles, but if we're really basing the notability of this person, aside from being a WP:BANDMEMBER, it'll take more than these sources. Howard the Duck (talk) 09:20, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Although, somehow are accurate but it doesn't mean you cannot use it. The interviewee may or may not be independent of the subject matter. In some cases, the interviewer is also not independent. this applies to the statement made by the subject, not the entire interview article.

On WP:INTERVIEW: It is okay to use interviews to source some facts. Interviews may sometimes be the best or clearest sources, especially for biographical or personal information and as I said it is clearly independent, have significant coverage, and reliable since it was editorially controlled. and Billboard Philippines and Vogue Philippines are the one who interviewed the subject and it is not a conflict of interest. Independent sources are more generally reliable than sources that have a conflict of interest or are otherwise involved in the subject. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:02, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To explain further, "source" in interview is the interviewee (the one being interviewed), not the one doing the interview (the journalist in behalf of the publication). This is explained in "The general rule is that any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary source." If the article is about the life and times of the interviewee, then that leaves wiggle room for secondary sources.

To reiterate, it doesn't matter if the publication is what you'd consider" high quality".

Remember, encyclopedias are tertiary sources, so it should have filtered the secondary sources, which should had done the same with the primary source. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 17:55, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 19:02, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By now, the article has been culled of her activities with other Bini members. The article now boils to:

Her auditioning for Star Hunt Academy (I think that thing was not called "Star Hunt Auditions"), but then the next sentence says she auditioned for Big Brother first(?)... so which is which???
A section supposedly describing activities since 2021 but only starts in 2024 on a social media incident where she asked for privacy. Then the rest of paragraphy is reactions soup.
Her being WP:INTERVIEWed in Billboard Philippines... I guess the word count increases if you add the name of the interviewer?
Her fashion sense.
Her being an ABS-CBN talent being one of the best dressed in the ABS-CBN Ball... and more fashion sense and no actual modeling.

FWIW, none of these merits inclusion in a BLP article. Howard the Duck (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fnaire

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

Questionable amount of notability and sigcov to deserve its own article. YouTube and Genius "sources" do not count. MimirIsSmart (talk) 15:54, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Morocco. MimirIsSmart (talk) 15:54, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (still new here, didn't know that YouTube is not a reliable source!)

I updated the sources and removed YouTube and Genius. Please have a look and let me know if there are better ways to improve the article. Rap no Davinci (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Specific analysis of available sources would be quite helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: to make it easier to my fellow editors, here are some of the main reasons why they pass for WP:ARTIST (my bad as the creator of the article not to include them from the beginning):

• Awarded the prestigious royal decoration Order of Ouissam Alaouite by the King of Morocco for their artistic contributions to Moroccan music. [s], [s 2]

• They performed at Mawazine in 2019,[16] top 5 biggest festivals in the world [17] and the biggest in Africa. [named by billboard [18]]

• The first Moroccan hip hop act to perform during the NBA All-Star Game halftime show in 2017. [19] [20]

• A collaborative song with India's T-Series and Nora Fathi. [21]

They are one of the most influential hip hop acts in Morocco's history, my mistake I included YouTube links at first not knowing it's not reliable on Wikipedia.

Let me know if anything else is needed. Cheers! Rap no Davinci (talk) 16:37, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Proposed deletions

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

References

[1] "Indian rapper asks 'Talha Kaun?', Talha Anjum responds with a brutal diss track". Images.Dawn.com. Dawn Media Group. 21 May 2025. Retrieved 23 May 2025.

[2] "Young Stunners' new Album Rebirth is a must listen". Samaa TV.

[3] "Open Letter - Talha Anjum [Album Review]".

[4] "Open Letter Talha Anjum's album blend of hip-hop and Urdu poetry".

[5] "Umair and Jokhay The man behind the rise of Talha Anjum amd Talha Younas".

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

Bands and musicians

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Categories

References