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

Alexa Valentino

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

Not meeting the notability. WP:TOOSOON - The9Man ^Talk 19:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Artists. - The9Man ^Talk 19:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PROMO, when the lead sentence mentions her talent agency... This [1] is about all I can find. Coverage now in the article is primary, or databases. I don't see that any musical notability has been met. Oaktree b (talk) 19:43, 25 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) 19:51, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The sources do not support the notability of this "up and coming" actress; an online source does not provide the kind of significant coverage to establish notability. Seems like WP:PROMO. Fails [[WP:NACTOR] and WP:NMUSICIAN. Netherzone (talk) 22:55, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ba. (band)

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

Still unsourced after 7 years. Dicklyon (talk) 05:31, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Doesn't qualify for WP:MUSIC as the only readily available sources discussing this band are from the band. RandFreeman (talk) 08:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very Weak Keep: A small search yielded at least one source not from the band confirming their signing with Sony Music Entertainment Finland. I'm imagining that, an in depth search would probably give more results that aren't directly sourced by the subjects, given the recent albums, and signing and releases with a major music producer, there will probably be increased notability in the coming months, and likely more sources. I would say give it a few months and revisit this to see if there are any changes. If it's been there for seven years, an additional six months doesn't seem like a big deal for me. Foxtrot620 (talk) 18:01, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Lithuania. Shellwood (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Lithuanian Wikipedia article has seven references. Have those been considered and examined? Left guide (talk) 18:40, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ryushin Handa

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

So, this article was previously deleted under G11 and A7. I'm not tagging it for speedy again since it kind of makes a claim of importance but honestly, it still doesn't look like it meets the bar for notability. Most of the references are either not reliable, not independent, or not secondary. The few reliable sources that are included only mention the subject briefly, without any substantial focus or in-depth coverage. Junbeesh (talk) 06:38, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Junbeesh (talk) 06:38, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Psychic Fever from Exile Tribe. Almost everything in this article is about activities as part of the group. Definitely clears the low bar of A7 though! Moritoriko (talk) 00:47, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Yasir

AfDs for this article:

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

Some mentions, Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:35, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Terrorism, and Iraq. Shellwood (talk) 16:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Saudi Arabia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:16, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no independent source found agree with nom--Unclethepoter (talk) 21:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - a munshi, like a cantor or chancellor in other Abrahamic religions, is not automatically notable, and there's a lack of reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 01:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rico Gulda

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

Not notable, failing WP GNG, not sourced with reliable third party links Maladano (talk) 14:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Maladano (talk) 14:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Austria. Shellwood (talk) 14:52, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose: All these sources I used, are reliable third party sources. None of these sources promote him, nor is there an issue of conflict of interest in them. (The German-language sources can be translated via Google Translate.) This pianist is prominent enough on his own to warrant a Wikipedia article, not because he is the son of a famous pianist, who already has his own Wikipedia article. That is why, I created this article. The article should not be construed in any way as a promotional article, because it is not. It is a biographical article and I made sure that it conforms to Wikipedia guidelines. Oratas (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not true that all of the sources in the article are third party sources, but this review of a performance and the paragraph he gets in this entry about his family are, and together they just about satisfy WP:GNG. There's also other coverage of his work, including this review in American Record Guide (which describes one of his early releases as "without a doubt one of the worst Schumann recordings I have heard in a long time"), this piece in The Washington Post, and these additional reviews [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. I think there's enough to pass WP:NCREATIVE and WP:GNG. MCE89 (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - we've seen that in science fiction, in off-Broadway, and in classical music, that sometimes scathing criticism is the best evidence of notability. Bearian (talk) 01:49, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joey Pearson

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

Does not meet WP:NMUSIC, all coverage found in WP:BEFORE was either WP:ROUTINE or from primary sources. I am also bundling the singer's albums, all of which have been unreferenced since creation more than 15 years ago:

Coeusin (talk) 13:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Bands and musicians, Music, and California Coeusin (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable singer. No sourcing found outside of social media. Doesn't appear to have had a charted single, or any other MUSIC requirements to show notability. Sourcing now in the article isn't helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 13:37, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All - He had a couple of minor TV appearances as a budding child star in the early 2000s and got a record deal, but he never achieved any reliable media coverage of his singing career and I can find no pro reviews for any of his teenage albums. Then he faded back into normal life. The article has been sitting here with no references since that era and could have been deleted 17 years ago. Better late than never. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:26, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm less willing to assume that "sources must exist" for child stars. The current unreliable links include one to MySpace. Bearian (talk) 01:53, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juan van Emmerloot

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

Gets the odd mention here and there in RS, but as far as I can tell there's nothing direct and in detail (WP:SIGCOV) to the point that we would be able to substantially base an article off independent, secondary sources. The closest thing I could find is an interview in Interface.nl (which has also been republished in a couple of other places apparently), but the independent parts of that are very minimal. Unfortunately unlikely we would be able to have an article on this person meeting sourcing requirements. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Netherlands. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tatul Avoyan

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

Cannot find any sources that are independent of the subject. WP:NOTABLOG Nixleovel (talk) 04:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Armenia. Nixleovel (talk) 04:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Person fails notability guidelines and article has no sources. A search reveals no articles about him, reliable or not. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 05:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE Not notable as there are no RS about him Dualpendel (talk) 17:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ToTheBones

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

Utter lack of WP:SIGCOV. Potentially UPE. jellyfish ✉ 00:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Music. jellyfish ✉ 00:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As stated above, lack of significant, reliable coverage. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 04:15, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The group looks likely to meet WP:MUSIC with coverage from, e.g., The Guardian ([7]), NME ([8]), The Line of Best Fit ([9]), and Drowned in Sound ([10]). I doubt this exhausts their 2008-era coverage (going to paper probably necessary for much more). Chubbles (talk) 05:43, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:43, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No SIGCOV in RS. No awards, charting, certified gold. The band hasn't posted on Myspace or Facebook in the last 7 years. Their website is down. I only found a couple of Youtube videos from 11 and 13 years ago. I also found a few more sources but from many years ago. Most likely they have disbanded. Either way notability is not met. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:15, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Aside from the SIGCOV identified by Chubbles, I found: [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. We indeed don't know whether they didbanded or not, but there are enough coverage of their work to keep the article. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 03:46, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tasila Mwale

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

Subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. The article provides no significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Most references are either user-generated, promotional, or trivial. No evidence of sustained national or international notability. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Africa. THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. Shellwood (talk) 18:56, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bozo Ratliff

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

I tried looking for any information about this musician, whose article just says he wrote one song, and I couldn't even find anything about him. Not even the BBC interview at the bottom of the article was archived, assuming it ever existed. GamerPro64 17:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bands and musicians. GamerPro64 17:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:27, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom, a search on Newspapers.com returns zero results pertaining to this person (who may not have even existed.) Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 20:32, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be interesting if this turns out to be a hoax. GamerPro64 21:49, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory B. Johnson

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

Disputed Prod. No evidence of in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 11:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 11:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cameo (band). He did a few solo things outside of Cameo, which are already briefly mentioned at their article, and not notable enough to justify an article of his own. All other accomplishments are with Cameo. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 was and is a major creator of music over the past twenty years as well as a key producer of her own work as well as Alan Vega's work. She has been a part of and mentor in a critical movement in music since the mid-1980s. Laurakdcwiki (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And we have no sources that talk about her beyond brief mentions, your statement is not supported by the sources. Oaktree b (talk) 00:45, 15 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]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you noticed that all the reliable sources are about Alan Vega?TheLongTone (talk) 15:08, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please specify which of the sources are more than trivial, as the only mention her name in passing. You'll need more than these to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:44, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep enough coverage on her own accord to set her apart from Alan Vega connection--Burroughs'10 (talk) 17:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see that two of the above opinions are of very new editors and the third, also a new editor, is the page creator. Call me suspicious, but....I'm suspicious,TheLongTone (talk) 15:05, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheLongTone Why do you say "the third, also a new editor, is the page creator"? The page was created by Cannery Row (talk · contribs), who has been creating and editing music articles since 2010. PamD 08:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, maybe you're assuming that a red-linked editor is always new. No, some just prefer to keep a low profile. PamD 08:29, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources 2 and 4 are interviews with Liz, the rest are about her spouse. None of these are extensive coverage, most only mention her in passing. None of these are helpful. I don't see coverage about this person either. Oaktree b (talk) 00:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Much of the cited coverage is indeed in the context of Alan Vega, however this reliable source is very clear that Lamere was not simply his spouse, but rather "his frequent collaborator" so provided creative input in her own right. Another example in Pitchfork magazine where the subject clearly has co-recording credit on Mutator. The subject has released two solo albums which have received coverage in independent sources, such as Gale A810819644. Furthermore the book she co-authored has received reliable critical attention, for example [18]. Multiple sources with non-trivial coverage of the subject and her works; enough in my view for a WP:BASIC/WP:MUSICBIO pass. ResonantDis_tortion 08:36, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Plenty of sourcing about her albums and book. An article like this (ref 17 at the moment) is about her and her album, not him, even though he gets a mention in the title ("Liz Lamere Alan Vega's Longtime Collaborator Announces Debut Album"). PamD 08:36, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment These so-called reliable sources lok pretty niche to me.TheLongTone (talk) 13:32, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the sources may be debatable/unassessed; but Record Collector, BrooklynVegan, and Pitchfork (magazine) are all listed reliable at WP:RSMUSIC. And certainly the Library Journal appears to meet RS criteria. ResonantDis_tortion 16:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per Wikipedia guidelines requiring comments to originate with a human. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Keep: — Liz Lamere meets notability criteria based on her own professional achievements. She has released two solo albums on the respected label In The Red Records, both of which received independent press coverage. In 2024, she co-authored a professionally published biography, Infinite Dreams: The Life of Alan Vega, which received critical attention and a foreword by Bruce Springsteen. Her solo work and authorship have been covered in major media outlets including Rolling Stone, and she was personally interviewed by The New York Times in both 2017 and 2023. This establishes significant independent coverage beyond her association with Alan Vega. Additionally, her three-decade collaboration with Vega — during which she performed most of the electronic instrumentation on his albums, co-wrote songs, co-produced, toured extensively, and managed his career — is itself notable and should not be dismissed simply because many articles focus on Vega. Her creative contributions were integral to their joint work and form part of a documented career spanning more than 30 years. --99.42.1.246 (talk) 17:16, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This also strikes me as AI-generated. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:18, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per Wikipedia guidelines requiring comments to originate with a human. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Keep: Liz Lamere’s co-authorship of the approximately 400-page hardcover biography, Infinite Dreams: The Life of Alan Vega, constitutes a significant literary achievement that deepens historical understanding of one of underground music’s most influential figures. Professionally published and introduced by Bruce Springsteen, the book offers rare primary insight into Vega’s legacy while highlighting Lamere’s own role as a cultural documentarian and creative peer. Her position as biographer and archivist is distinct from, yet informed by, her decades of musical collaboration with Vega. The book has received critical attention in national outlets, including an interview with The New York Times, reinforcing her notability beyond association. Lamere has also performed on numerous albums throughout the 1990s and released two internationally distributed solo records in 2022 and 2024, available both digitally and on vinyl. These were supported by solo tours in the U.S. and Europe, along with media appearances on radio and podcasts focused on her original work. Lamere’s combined contributions as a musician, author, and public voice underscore her notability, as does her enduring influence as a role model for emerging women artists in music. --2A0D:E487:118F:661A:3939:96C1:D3D6:1590 (talk) 19:26, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- CommentWhy are all these IP editors piling in to defend an article creared by a walled garden editor? I only ask,
TheLongTone (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be AI-generated. jlwoodwa (talk) 15:13, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This comment is obviously AI-generated and should not be considered by the closer. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:18, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I have relisted this per Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2025_June_21#Liz_Lamere_(closed). I have also sem'ed the discussion to avoid further canvassing issues
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:19, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I've gone through (what I believe are) all of the sources mentioned and I'm not seeing significant coverage of the subject, Liz Lamere. There are plenty of trivial mentions of Lamere and her book and albums, a paragraph or two here and there, but nothing that meets the requirements of GNG, AUTHOR, MUSICBIO, or any other notability guideline. Woodroar (talk) 22:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I quoted two applicable notability guidelines above. WP:MUSICBIO requires the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself, and WP:BASIC which states If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. Regarding the former, this review is sigcov about a notable album, with a paragraph devoted to Lamere that is evidently not "trivial" - she is clearly inherent to the piece of work. Another example in the NME (another RS) where Lamere is not a mere passing mention, but is inherent to both the album production and release. There are multiple articles in BrooklynVegan (an WP:RSMUSIC source) with a variety of coverage that can be combined per WP:BASIC to form usable "non trivial" coverage. The review of her solo album in Record Collector is also not "trivial" coverage. Coverage does not need to be about the subject directly, it can be about their works. With multiple non-trivial coverage, MUSICBIO therefore appears to be passed, and that's before taking account of the book reviews, and further coverage in unassessed sources such as [19]&[20]. Regarding the latter guideline, WP:BASIC, there appears to be sufficient reliable sourcing to be able to easily write an article on the subject: paragraphs of coverage from many secondary sources does count. ResonantDis_tortion 05:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two or three passing mentions in an album review under someone else's name is the definition of trivial. Many album reviews mention band members, significant contributors, even cover artists, but we rarely consider these passing mentions to be significant coverage. Woodroar (talk) 17:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Passing mentions do not count toward notability. For GNG coverage must be directly on the subject, and it does not matter what the coverage says (or how "important" the subject is implied to be) if it is not significant in depth and detail. The Quietus contains a single sentence of secondary coverage shared with her husband (the recounting of the live music gig is primary) N. NME has passing mentions of Lamere, always in the context of Vega or her new collaborator, and with no real info on her specifically N. Brooklyn Vegan is the same, plus some quotes from her (which don't count either) N. Pitchfork has part of one sentence mentioning her N. "Regen Mag" is clearly user-generated/SPS and thus unusable N. Fused is the only source that could potentially be used, but I'm put off by their promotional vibe, the lack of info on editorial policy, and statements on their contact page like Whether you’re an artist with a story to share, a traveller in search of inspiration, or a brand that shares our values, we welcome your message. and We welcome article proposals and creative pitches in the fields of contemporary art, design, creative travel and global cultural experiences. [...] To pitch, send your full idea with supporting links or portfolio samples via email. And anyway, multiple sources are required for GNG.
A very brief blurb on a coauthored biography of Vega is not enough for AUTHOR. JoelleJay (talk) 00:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bhanu Srivastav

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

Non-notable author. All sources about him are thinly disguised self-published advertorials which promote his so-called "inspiring story." Most of these sources share one common feature apart from the blatant promotion: an AI-generated image of someone holding his book. The article creator is a WP:SPA who is WP:!HERE with the sole purpose of promoting this individual, his book and an event he claims to have managed. Yuvaank (talk) 21:12, 22 June 2025 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related page which uses the same spam sources:[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, Technology, and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with the nominators assessment that the sources are spam and the articles are also spam. Alpha3031 (t • c) 02:48, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agreeing the nominations; both seem artificially sourced from spammy promotional material. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 06:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS - two of the only good sources are from the past two months and are news stories - and WP:TOOSOON - his continuing relevance is difficult to assess for a relatively new and young philanthropist. Bearian (talk) 16:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per Wikipedia guidelines requiring comments to originate with a human. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Keep !vote Keep per WP:GNG, WP:PRESERVE, and WP:BEFORE

Disclosure: I represent the subject per WP:COI.

1. Notability Conclusively Established (WP:BIO) Independent significant coverage exists across three distinct notability pathways in India's most authoritative editorial outlets:

WP:AUTHOR (Literary significance): • India Today (17 May 2024): Thematic analysis of *Deified*'s exploration of marital oppression ("Sanvi’s fight for freedom") • Financial Express (10 Apr 2024): Narrative critique dissecting societal pressures

WP:ENTREPRENEUR (Career documentation): • Times of India (11 Mar 2025): Career profile detailing departure from banking to found AI venture INFINITY • Outlook India (22 Jun 2024): Business reporting on viral resignation

WP:CHARITY (Philanthropic impact): • Outlook India (29 May 2024): Verified documentation of royalty donations to Childline India

→ Policy compliance: Exceeds WP:SIGCOV threshold with 20+ paragraphs of substantive coverage across four national publications.

2. Source Reliability: Unassailable (WP:RS) Editorial control: All sources are staff-written in outlets with: • Times of India (Est. 1838; 4M+ circulation; editorial standards) • Financial Express (Est. 1961; financial authority) • India Today (Top English magazine with 40+ editorial staff) • Outlook (National Magazine Award winner)

No paid content: No advertorials or press releases used Weak sources excluded: Zee News, DNA India, Republic intentionally omitted

3. Preemptive Neutrality Enforcement ✓ All promotional language removed ✓ Zero unsourced claims ✓ Exclusive use of Tier-1 sources ✓ Edits open for community oversight per WP:COIEDIT

4. Corroborating Evidence • Academic recognition: University of Munich research paper analyzing *Deified*'s social themes (Scholar) • Literary corpus: 4+ books indexed on Google Books • Media footprint: 18+ articles in Google News

5. Closing Legal Imperative Deletion would violate several core Wikipedia principles: • WP:PRESERVE – verifiable content should not be deleted • WP:BEFORE – improvement is preferred over deletion • WP:BLP – ensures accurate representation of living people • WP:CRED – all sources meet highest editorial standards

The coverage in Times of India (1838–), India Today (1975–), Outlook (award-winning), and Financial Express (est. 1961) provides irrefutable evidence of notability per WP:GNG. I urge !vote Keep and invite collaborative improvements.

-- surya7t (talk) Surya7t (talk) 10:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wikipedia is not a free advertising platform. duffbeerforme (talk) 01:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per Wikipedia guidelines requiring comments to originate with a human. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

@Duffbeerforme, Bearian, and Alpha3031: Final Policy Defense: !vote Keep per WP:GNG, WP:PRESERVE, and WP:BEFORE Disclosure: I represent the subject per WP:COI. The article has been fully sanitized to comply with all policies:

1. "Addressing Advertising" Concern (duffbeerforme) • The article contains zero promotional language - current version proves no "visionary/inspiring" exists • Cites only editorial journalism from India's top outlets:

 - India Today: Literary analysis of marital oppression themes  
 - Times of India: Career documentation

Labeling this "advertising" violates WP:ASPERSIONS. I challenge you to identify one non-neutral phrase.

2. “Too Soon” or “News-Based” Concern (Bearian) Coverage meets WP:GNG because: • Not "news" but deep profiles:

Substantive Coverage Analysis
Source	Type	Depth	Policy Compliance
Financial Express	Literary critique	1200+ words	WP:AUTHOR
Outlook	Philanthropic program	Permanent structure	WP:ORG

• Timeline spans 25+ months (India Today: Mar 2023 → ToI: Mar 2025) • Established career: 10+ year banking tenure pre-dates coverage Per WP:CRYSTAL, deletion cannot speculate on "future relevance" when current sources satisfy WP:SIGCOV.

3. “Spam Sources” Concern (Alpha3031) This claim is factually false and policy-violating: • Sources are India's most authoritative outlets:

Source Credibility Matrix
Outlet	Est.	Circulation	Awards	WP Precedent
Times of India	1838	4M+	50+ National Awards	Chetan Bhagat
India Today	1975	1.2M	Ramnath Goenka Award	Arundhati Roy

• Calling them "spam":

 1. Violates WP:ASPERSIONS  
 2. Contradicts WP:NEWSORG  
 3. Threatens Category:Indian writers

Provide specific WP:RS violations or withdraw per WP:AGF.

Policy Compliance Proof Y WP:GNG: 20+ paragraphs across 5+ sources Y WP:AUTHOR/WP:ENTREPRENEUR: Multi-domain notability Y WP:NPOV: Zero promotional content Y WP:BLP: All claims sourced to Tier-1 outlets

Policy Compliance Warning

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Deletion would violate core Wikipedia policies: 1. WP:PRESERVE: Destroying verifiable, policy-compliant content 2. WP:BEFORE: Overlooking completed improvements 3. WP:CRED: Rejecting India's oldest newspapers

This discussion now tests fundamental standards: • Whether Times of India (est. 1838) qualifies as reliable • Whether 1200-word literary critiques constitute "significant coverage" • Whether permanent philanthropic programs establish notability

Precedent implication: Closing delete would logically require re-evaluating thousands of articles citing these sources, including Chetan Bhagat and Arundhati Roy.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Surya7t (talk) 04:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Final human plea: !vote Keep per WP:GNG & WP:PRESERVE Reply to all participants: Disclosure: Hi Everyone, I am Bhanu Srivastav, the subject of this article. I'm writing this myself without using any AI tools, as a real person fighting for accurate representation of myself. My conflict of interest is unavoidable, but I'm engaging in good faith as per WP:COI.

1. "Advertising" claim is false - here's proof This was very confusing at first to my why advertising was claimed,i read the wikipedia article...I doublechecked, the article has NO promotional language AT ALL...The article contains ZERO promotional language: - No "inspiring", "visionary", "motivating" or similar adjectives exist in my paage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhanu_Srivastav) - Sources are like, proper journalism independent ones:

 • Times of India: [Career doc](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/events/from-zero-to-infinity-how-bhanu-srivastav-risked-everything-to-build-indias-ai-revolution/articleshow/119866286.cms) by staff writers  
 • India Today: [Literary analysis](https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/story/despair-to-empowerment-exploring-bhanu-srivastavs-deified-2540235-2024-05-17) of social themes

These outlets never contacted me, i think they might have picked the data from publically available on internet - they're objective reports. Honestly Calling these 'spam' feels totally unfair, Even Delhi Chief Mininster Mr Arvind Krjriwal praised me publically for my efforts to educate Poor childrens who can't afford fees on Lokmat Conference i have that part of footage here, his whole speech can be listened here at timestamp 31:07 minutes, which is available in public domain (Official Channel with 7.44 million subscribers). **But I know that YouTube isn't a wiki source, i was just sharing my context.**

2. Notability is established & timeless To be honest my documented works is spread in multiple years: 2013-2024: Banking career (pre-dates coverage) I worked as IT Manager in Canara Bank. April 2024: Financial Express 1200-word critique May 2024: Outlook documents permanent charity (actually i have partnered with Childline India which is supported by the Ministry of Women & Child Development, Government of India to donate all my royalties for poor children's education, i have the contract document with me in case you need to see..) March 2025: Times of India career transition analysis This isn't "recent news" - it's substantive coverage of lasting work (i worked 10 years in canara bank then left to found my company). I'm no expert but pretty sure Deleting based on "too soon" violates WP:CRYSTAL?

3. Sources are India's journalistic pillars Labeling these "spam" is factually wrong i think and damaging also: • Times of India (est. 1838): India's largest English daily - used in Chetan Bhagat • India Today (est. 1975): National Magazine Award winner - used in Arundhati Roy • Financial Express (est. 1961): Financial authority - used in N. R. Narayana Murthy Calling them unreliable would force deletion of List of Indian authors and invalidate 10,000+ Wikipedia citations think.

Core policy compliance ✓ WP:GNG: 20+ paragraphs across 5+ sources ✓ WP:AUTHOR: Literary analysis in India Today/Financial Express & other news. ✓ Philanthropic notability: Permanent donations documented by Outlook & other sources i also have proof of proper contract signed between me and Childline India which is govt-backed org ✓ WP:BEFORE: All improvements completed

Final appeal Deleting this article would: 1. Violate WP:PRESERVE by destroying policy-compliant content whiich is not right as per my openion, i think instead of deleting what is promotional in that article can be found corrected. I’m not an expert, so I welcome correction fron anyone & everyone. 2. Insult Indian media by dismising Times of India and other sources... 3. Punish my goodfaith efforts to fix every issue I'll accept ANY neutral edits - just preserve my documented history. Please guide me how can i help or any other details are required from me to comply wikipedia policy. Thank yo so much for your time,Thanks for letting me be part of this process, even though I know I’m not a regular editor. Just wanted to give context from my side which i frankly think can help the wikipedia community. I respect whatever decision is made.

Keep

Surya7t (talk) 19:25, 24 June 2025 (UTC)Surya7t[reply]

Just to be clear, you think it's objectively true that you're the most fearless person ever? Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:32, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank u so much for raising this important thing about neutrality.

Just to clarify: I didn’t call myself "the most fearless person" ever. That phrase comes from a Times of India editorial (March 2025) likely the journalist’s take on my resignation from Canara Bank one year back in June 2024. the story was, I faced 17 transfers in 10 years my service (2014 - 2024) & since public-sector bank jobs in India are secure & rarely resigned from, it caught attention. It trended on X.com in June 2024 & media outlets like Moneycontrol.com & Dainik Jagran contacted me for interviews which I declined. My resignation mail was short & polite which said "sorry I’ll not be joining" went viral online screenshots were shared widely. In India's public sector banking system job security is absolute & resignations are very very rare, since it was an unusual case, the media might have framed it their way.

If u search "Bhanu Srivastav resignation" on internet you’ll find hundreds of screenshots of my resignation mail which was circulated at that time from past coverage or socialmedia.

I completely agree such subjective labels don’t belong on Wikipedia. As of now, the article does not use “fearless” or any such similar phrasing. u can check the same, I’m absolutely open to further improvements per WP:NPOV.

Thanx again Apha3031 for helping ensure accuracy & neutrality. My goal is strict adherence of Wikipedia’s policy not to defend media phrasing. I appreciate your vigilance in ensuring neutrality. Surya7t (talk) 11:31, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Punish my goodfaith efforts to fix every issue". But you've only made one small edit to the page. Oh, you mean with your other account, Ashish Verma 9891? The account that created and owns copyright of your signature so has to be you. That's sockpuppetry. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:52, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Duffbeerforme,

Thank you so much for your vigilance & keeping Wikipedia’s standards high. I want to be completely transparent, I’m Bhanu Srivastav & both Surya7t & AshishVerma9891 are my accounts. Seriously I now realize that using 2nd account was a serious mistake & violates Wikipedia’s sockpuppetry policy WP:SOCK. I’m very sorry for this & confusion & extra work I’ve caused you & the wiki community.

Account Issue:

I used AshishVerma9891 alongside Surya7t, which violates WP:SOCK. I will:

(i) Immediately stop using AshishVerma9891.

(ii) Request admin help to merge/attribute its edits to Surya7t (to preserve content).

(iii) Edit only as Surya7t going forward, with full WP:COI disclosure.

Article Status:

(i) The content meets WP:GNG via Times of India, India Today, etc.

(ii) All promotional language has been removed per WP:NPOV.

(iii) I welcome any more improvements from the community.

Moving Forward:

(i) I’ll follow all guidance from experienced editors like yourself.

(ii) I'm happy to complete any Wikipedia training if needed.

Request: I understand the seriousness of this violation and will accept community's decision regarding both the article and my editing privileges.Let’s focus on the article’s verifiable content, I’m committed to keeping it policy-compliant. Thanks for your patience.

— surya7t ~~~~ Surya7t (talk) 02:29, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dalyboy

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

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. I did a Google search of him and didn't find reliable coverage independent of him. All of the article's sources are primary sources. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 00:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 00:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Per my review, he appears to meet some of the criteria for WP:MUSICBIO. He has charted on Apple Music, received significant and consistent airplay according to several press sources, and produced and featured in a movie that was nominated for awards — with the nomination also mentioned on Van Vicker’s page. I would recommend a ‘keep’ while the article continues to be improved. Klighnight (talk) 06:56, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apple Music charts are WP:SINGLEVENDOR charts and cannot be used to establish notability. Dalyboy did not chart on any country's official music chart. This particular subject does not meet any criterion outlined in MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 14:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’d like to seek clarification regarding his notability, as reflected on Van Vicker's Wikipedia page, specifically in relation to his film Heart Breaker’s Revenge, which he (Dalyboy) produced and starred in. The film reportedly received nominations and won awards in some categories at the San Diego Black Film Festival, Nafca, and the MPAH Awards.

While I’ve noticed that some of these accolades are referenced in press coverage and on the Wikipedia pages of his colleagues, I’m unsure if they’ve been sufficiently highlighted on his own page to support his notability under the WP:NACTOR guidelines, particularly given his dual profile as both an actor and musician.

Kindly advice. Klighnight (talk) 15:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any evidence that he starred in the film you mentioned. Per the film's IMDB page, Van Vicker's character went by the name Dalyboy Paul. I don't see Dalyboy Belgason listed among the film credits. Even if he he had a major role in this particular film, it won't justify a keep vote because this particular film fails WP:NFLIM and is not notable. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 15:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Upon reviewing the film’s IMDb page (see: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16116480/fullcredits/), it’s clearly stated that Dalyboy Belgason is credited as the director, writer, and cast member.

According to WP:NFILM, particularly the section on Other evidence of notability, point #3 states: “The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking.” The said film has indeed received multiple significant nominations and has won awards in some categories, with Dalyboy himself playing a role in the production and as part of the cast.

Given this, it raises the question of how the film would fail to meet this criterion when it evidently satisfies the award recognition requirement.

Furthermore, under Inclusionary criteria in the same WP:NFILM guideline, it’s standard practice to mention other notable figures associated with the production. In this case, I have repeatedly referenced Van Vicker, who, based on his body of work and existing recognitions, clearly meets the WP:NACTOR notability threshold.

From my review, both the film and its key cast members, including Dalyboy, appear to meet the necessary criteria for inclusion as outlined in the guidelines.

Unless there’s another specific aspect or standard we might be overlooking, I’d appreciate it if you could kindly point it out for clarity. Klighnight (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Stop talking through an AI program and start talking through your own typed words. Nathannah • 📮 16:08, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, youre confusing yourself here. You claimed that Dalyboy starred in the film, Heart Breaker's Revenge. I debunked that by pointing out that he didn't per info on the film's IMBD page. You than proceeded to mention a different film altogether. Heart Breaker's Revenge and Ex Games are not the same films. Just for your info, IMDB isn't a reliable source. I cannot find a credible source online that mentions or discusses the film Ex Games. Both Heart Breaker's Revenge and Ex Games fail WP:NFLIM and are not notable. If you disagree with me, I challenge you to write separate articles about them and let's see if both articles won't be deleted. Which major award did the film Ex Games win? Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 16:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’m honestly wondering which IMDb page you’ve been checking, because it’s clearly not the same one I’m referring to. Here — https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3756776/ — it’s publicly stated that Dalyboy Belgason wrote and directed the film. It’s also worth noting that this appears to be a duplicate of https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16116480/, and both are evidently the same movie. This is further confirmed by its official YouTube listing here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDlBSXvxxEE — Heart Breakers Revenge (Van Vicker, Sarodj Bertin, Billy Williams) Ex Games.

I honestly don’t understand why this back and forth is necessary. If there’s been an oversight on your part, it’s fair to acknowledge that and move on. I personally don’t have an issue with the page being deleted — I’m only pointing out verifiable facts based on the same WP:NFILM and WP:MUSICBIO guidelines which were cited as reasons for its deletion, but which, quite evidently, the subject meets in certain areas.

This same film and its associated awards have also been accepted to establish notability on pages of his colleagues, so it’s difficult not to notice a double standard in this case. That said, I have no intention of dragging this further. Being asked to create a separate page for the film, when there appears to be clear systemic bias in how these guidelines are applied, isn’t something I’m interested in pursuing any longer.

I’ll leave it at that. Klighnight (talk) 16:47, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
None of this matters because IMDb is a user-generated and disqualified source; please find more reliable sources. Nathannah • 📮 19:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My concern with this entire process is that it now appears to be a poorly thought-out plan. It’s also evident that several of you are voting ‘delete’ without properly reviewing the page or considering the defense presented.

Firstly, the nominator initially claimed Dalyboy wasn’t in the movie. I addressed this by providing evidence that Dalyboy produced, wrote, and acted in Heart Breaker’s Revenge. Secondly, while the nominator accepted (albeit indirectly) that the same film and its awards were sufficient for establishing notability for other actors involved, you're now insisting that Dalyboy must provide additional sources, which is a clear double standard and contradicts Wikipedia’s policy against systemic bias.

Thirdly, it was claimed the article failed WP:MUSICBIO, but I demonstrated that it meets criterion #11 of that guideline.

Frankly, the tone and direction of your responses today suggest a personal bias. Your initial comment about my writing style had no relevance to the points I raised, and your latest dismissive remark, “none of this matters”, further confirms that.

Let me be clear, it’s acceptable if the article is ultimately deleted, but I have every right to challenge any reasoning I believe is flawed. Even the nominator has shown bias in this case, stating that if a movie page is created for the aforementioned movie, it will be deleted, before it even exists. Wikipedia is a community project, not owned by any of us, and most of us have careers beyond this platform. I’d prefer not to continue this back and forth, but I needed to state this for the record. Klighnight (talk) 21:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We require proper and reliable sources that meet our standards, and actual conversations about notability that don't involve LLM text. If you cannot do that or find sources that help prove the subject's notability, there's nothing more we can do here. And because Nigerian TV is a mess of pay-for-play as far as video presentations, there's no way to easily prove the subject meets MUSICBIO criterion 11. Nathannah • 📮 22:43, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, why would a Cuban join the American army? You realize how that makes no sense at all, I hope. Nathannah • 📮 22:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the claim that Nigerian TV and radio media operate entirely on a payola system is not only insulting to the industry but also to the broadcasters, anchors, and journalists working there. I don’t know what personal issues you have with the Nigerian media, but this reinforces my earlier point, both you and the nominator (also appearing to be Nigerian) only nominated this article for deletion because it was written by and about a Nigerian. It reeks of bias and a lack of fair opportunity.

Even major platforms like Forbes and international media sometimes accept paid features, would it then be fair to say everything on those platforms is paid for? Generalizing like this is unreasonable.

As for the subject of this article, I never claimed he had TV plays since I couldn’t verify that. I clearly referenced his significant rotation on a national radio station, and even a basic X (Twitter) search of the track would show it got airplay on multiple national stations. Does that mean every station was paid? That’s part of the systemic bias I’m addressing. This is enough to prove he meets criterion 11 of MusicBio. A quick check on X will show more national radio stations playing his songs. If this same criterion is valid for determining notability for foreign artists, why should you then decide a Nigerian artist be exempt? Is there any rule stating certain countries are excluded?

Lastly, regarding your claim about a Cuban joining the U.S. Army, a simple check would’ve shown that U.S. permanent residents can enlist (https://www.usa.gov/military-requirements). If he met those criteria, it’s valid.

I’ve already cited one source for his award via a colleague’s page yesterday and will continue adding more independent coverage as I find them.

Gracias. Klighnight (talk) 05:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’ve openly admitted that he meets criterion #11 of WP:MUSICBIO, but insist it won’t count because the national radio rotations happened in Nigeria. This clearly highlights bias in your judgment, denying him the same standard others have benefitted from. Klighnight (talk) 05:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We're asking for sources to airplay. Solid, reliable sources. Please add them, because we don't accept hearsay. And for you to think I was attacking the entire Nigerian broadcast industry because of a few bad apples is a serious reach. Nathannah • 📮 14:37, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment — “And because Nigerian TV is a mess of pay-for-play as far as video presentations, there’s no way to easily prove the subject meets MUSICBIO criterion 11” was unfairly broad. It implies the entire Nigerian broadcast industry operates on payola, which isn’t accurate. If you’d said “some”, it wouldn’t have raised concern. Nigeria has produced exceptional broadcasters now thriving at BBC, CNN, and other reputable platforms abroad, despite isolated issues in parts of the industry.

Also, there’s a cited source, an independent report from P.M. News, confirming the song’s strong rotation on Beat FM, a respected national station with UK presence. Further checks on X (Twitter) also show airplay across major stations like City 105.1FM, Wazobia FM, Cool FM, Rhythm FM, and Soundcity Radio. Unless we’re suggesting all these outlets operate under a questionable system, dismissing this airplay isn’t balanced.

For reference, here are tweets from the official handles confirming the airplay:

1. https://x.com/city1051/status/1890009399076229547?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

2. https://x.com/wazobiafmabuja/status/1887096848227172444?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

3. https://x.com/thebeat999fm/status/1876566863070789853?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

4. https://x.com/coolfmabuja/status/1880205277569642514?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

5. https://x.com/937rhythmfm/status/1880327728676892981?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

6. https://x.com/thebeat97abj/status/1880510151410503871?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

7. https://x.com/coolfmnigeria/status/1875201079740346483?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

8. https://x.com/soundcity985fm/status/1869128239362478534?s=48&t=uwGCvYqxVterevcLcN6PBg

While X posts aren’t standalone sources for notability, they reflect public records from verified national radio accounts. Klighnight (talk) 17:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That site is not a proper source (they're merely social media feedbots listing what is 'now playing' on a radio station without any elaboration). Please read WP:RELIABLE. Nathannah • 📮 19:15, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My challenge remains your insistence on taking down this article. I’ve emphasized repeatedly that you’re free to do so, but I’m setting a precedent here. Since you joined this conversation, you’ve either downplayed my contributions or indirectly discredited my country’s media.

1. You claimed the subject failed WP:MUSICBIO. I pointed out that if Apple Charts is WP:SINGLEVENDOR, then criterion #11 applies, instead of acknowledging this, you dismissed Nigerian media as payola-driven.

2. I highlighted that this subject is also an actor-producer. The nominator wrongly claimed otherwise, and I provided IMDb proof of his credited roles in an award-nominated film, yet no acknowledgment, after you both argued.

3. Every argument you raised, I’ve countered with evidence. Rather than correct the nominator for a poorly reviewed nomination, you doubled down.

4. You made, deleted, and rephrased your last comment, while i carefully addressed each with facts. The PM News article is an independent, credible source widely used across the encyclopedia, the national rotation he enjoys was clearly noted in the article, with a cited source from the media outlet. Unless, of course, you’re suggesting that this media organization also operates a payola system. Alongside, in my last comment i showed you visible proofs from X of his radio airplay’s from verified stations (which you’ve seen), and i believe is enough to strengthen his notability.

At its core, this entire conversation reflects systemic bias, something I’ve respectfully called out. The subject meets WP:MUSICBIO and WP:NACTOR as written, and countless articles have stood on less.

Cheers Klighnight (talk) 21:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even in my previous comment where I shared evidence from X showing several national radio stations playing his song, I clearly stated, “While X posts aren’t standalone sources for notability, they reflect public records from verified national radio accounts.” Additionally, I’ve pointed out that the article itself cites a reliable source confirming the national rotation.

Yet, each time a request for information is met with verifiable facts, you acknowledge the subject meets that particular criterion, but because you’re intent on seeing the article taken down, you continue to shift the goalpost by asking for more. Klighnight (talk) 21:25, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At this point you're bludgeoning the discussion, so unless you'd like to follow our advice and add reliable sources, I've said what I need to. There was additional context I added to my last response, and nothing was removed. Nathannah • 📮 00:00, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can’t claim bludgeoning when I’ve consistently provided everything you’ve asked for. It’s important for me to emphasize certain points while addressing your requests. This is the same issue I’ve pointed out before, and now, once again, you’ve raised a claim of WP:BLUD.

That said, I do appreciate that you retracted your earlier statement about payola (which I previously highlighted) and took the time to explain the reason behind your comment, its deletion, and rephrasing.

With that out of the way, I’ve now cited another source I found to help support notability under WP:MUSICBIO criterion #11.

Cheers! Klighnight (talk) 09:08, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anywhere written in the encyclopedia’s guidelines that I cannot use an AI tool like Grammarly to ensure my writing is clear and properly structured? He highlighted certain requirements he considered in assessing whether the page is notable or not. I’m simply clarifying the specific parts of those same criteria that the subject meets — is that too much to do?

Even going by the same WP:MUSICBIO guideline, the subject appears to satisfy criterion #11: "Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network." The details supporting this are already available on his page. Klighnight (talk) 16:24, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. Nixleovel (talk) 06:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Nigeria and Cuba. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sources for the subject's notability or any of their song's performances (with the article creator talking about the subject's films, which are not noted at all in the article). Nathannah • 📮 16:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: We generally don't count Apple Music charts towards notability but the balance of coverage seems more about this fact, than the usual flowery coverage from Nigerian sources. sources 2, 5 and 11 I suppose, this isn't a strong keep, but better than most we see here Oaktree b (talk) 23:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your vote. You can check the page, they’re already attempting to vandalize it using IP accounts, with other global editors reverting the changes on the main and talk page. This clearly shows bias and a targeted attack on the page. It’s a failed plot, and that’s why I’m even responding. Klighnight (talk) 06:24, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Desiree Coleman

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

unnotable singer, fails GNG. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 16:02, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:06, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: The article about her marriage in the NY Times is fine. I find a few articles about her time on Broadway [21], [22]. There are likely more, these at least show critical notice of her career. Oaktree b (talk) 17:18, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as per Oaktree b and WP:BARE. There's enough of reviews for her to be just about notable. Bearian (talk) 14:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paramytha Lestari Mulyarto

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN, see: deletion log_1 dan log_2 on idwiki, per notability. 🅷🅴🅽🆁🅸 ^{(Let's talk)} ✉ 13:36, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Indonesia. Shellwood (talk) 13:37, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 June 21. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kat Williams

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

Non notable singer. Participating in America's Got Talent is not notable. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Found a little local interest but nothing significant. Asheville singer does something normal type thing. Despite the claim on the page, she was not nominated for that regional Emmy. (not the Mississippi Mass Choir Katrina Williams) duffbeerforme (talk) 03:36, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability has plainly not been established. I think it could return to draftspace to allow for more work, but coverage is simply not extensive and has not expanded since appearance on television show. PickleG13 (talk) 04:21, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and North Carolina. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:00, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I deprodded this because she has a claim to notability and a fairly strong fan base; see "beloved" and "praised". Bearian (talk) 15:00, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two gig announcements that contain the same false information as here. She was not nominated for that Regional Emmy. These two sources lack factchecking and just repeat from her promotional bio. duffbeerforme (talk) 23:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chan Chan (singer)

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

This page is mostly in a language other than English, and the singer does not appear to be noteworthy enough for an article with few listeners and press articles Dahawk04 (talk) 17:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Music, Television, and Myanmar. Skynxnex (talk) 17:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This comment appears to be a personal attack against Chan Chan, which is both inappropriate and unfounded. Chan Chan is an internationally followed artist with millions of followers, many of whom speak and understand English. Dismissing her relevance based on language or selective metrics ignores her actual reach, fanbase, and cultural impact. Let's keep the conversation respectful and based on facts. 93.69.21.30 (talk) 17:48, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - several articles with her as the main subject are found in the sources, meeting WP:SIGCOV. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 22:41, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Really? I was shocked to see that singer Chan Chan's article is nominated for AfD. Chan Chan is one of the most successful singers in my country and has also served as a judge on Myanmar Idol. Only legacy singers and highly accomplished musicians are invited to serve as judges in national singing competitions. This AfD nomination seems unclear and may be a random disruptive act targeting other editors. Here are some sources that clearly establish her notability: [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29]. Hteiktinhein (talk) 07:03, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: the provided sources are more than enough. Whether or not they are English is not a matter of concern. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 11:09, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Clearly well-known in her country with plenty of reliable sources. The article can be improved instead. Admins should view this nomination with suspicion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 20:53, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and agree per above. Htanaungg (talk) 09:13, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagamani Srinath

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

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:GNG. Winning an award does not grant inherent notability. Sources are mainly WP:NEWSORGINDIA. CNMall41 (talk) 18:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Music, and Indiana. CNMall41 (talk) 18:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - per nom. SachinSwami (talk) 18:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per Nomination Destinyokhiria (talk) 07:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: if the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award is really "the highest Indian recognition given to people in the field of performing arts.", then this loks like notability. PamD 15:16, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that she has an article in Telugu Wikipedia - I have merged her two records in Wikidata, so it now shows as a link from the en.wiki article. PamD 15:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Wikidata merge. I understand your contention but do not believe notability is inherent for simply winning an award. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:48, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 OK, looking at WP:MUSICBIO, criteria 7 and 8 appear to be met, unless you consider that 8 only applies to western popular music. PamD 19:51, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think something on the level the award is being claimed to be would fall under that criteria so Western/India would have no bearing. What I am saying is that even with an award, we still need significant coverage. Just winning an award does not guarantee notability. It even specifically says "may" be notable under that criteria. The sources we have are pour such as this (presented in the comment below) which is clearly unreliable as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- In addition to the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award, Nagamani Srinath was also honored with the Rajyotsava Award in 1998, the second-highest civilian honor conferred by the Karnataka Government[30]. Furthermore, according to an article published in The New Indian Express on June 22, 2015, she was awarded the Sangita Kala Acharya Award by the Madras Music Academy, Chennai, for her outstanding contributions to the field of Carnatic music[31].-SachinSwami (talk) 16:35, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source she has won some other notable awards such as Karnataka Kalashree. Also she has significant coverage in The Hindu and Deccan Herald.Afstromen (talk) 05:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Afstromen, all the sources I included don’t fully support the claim; they are all weak. Mentioning an award alone isn’t enough; you need sources that clearly reference Nagamani Srinath’s work, like a review. For example, in Akaal: The Unconquered, when I checked, all the sources you added were weak. Later, I searched and added 5 reviews in the Reception section, which are sufficient to fully support the film and pass WP:GNG. Though the rules for films and individuals differ, reviews clearly referencing the work are sufficient for support. (I have no intention of misleading editors, so I apologize.) SachinSwami (talk) 08:39, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Afstromen: you duplicated one of the sources which could indicate you did not look closely enough at them to see they are mainly routine announcements. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 Are you talking about The Hindu article or both?Afstromen (talk) 17:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You listed the DH twice in your comment. Both the DH and The Hindu are her giving the information by the way. Interviews and all content provided by her so not independent. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh No, I listed the source initially to point the awards. It was not my intention to list it twice or to give the impression that the sources were different. Afstromen (talk) 17:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see that now. Thanks for the explanation. I still maintain that neither of those are independent. I would also think if she won the "highest award" as claimed, there would be more than just NEWSORGINDIA and a few interview type references. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:56, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 04:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Endorse PamD above; subject meets WP:MUSICBIO#7-8; also this bio suggests that #11 (and to some extent #12) can also be met. There's more biographical information about the subject in (Rajagopalan 1990, pp. 171) though with limited online preview. Also, the use of "may" in MUSICBIO, to my understanding, means that the fulfilled criteria should be verifiable in reliable independent sources, and not that a significant coverage is required in addition. WeWake (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you address the rebuttal as well? There is no such thing as inherent notability. The "may" is there because it indicates the subject is likely notable, not that they "are" notable. Otherwise, why include may when it can be replaced with something more definite. Note WP:BASIC ("presumed notable" but not "are notable"), which also covers "one event" which may apply as well. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CNMall41, For a decades long career that's been recognized with several notable awards is not a case of WP:BLP1E in my opinion–the award makes it easier to obtain some news coverage but is not the only basis of notability here. For niche-musicians, traditional coverage might be hard to come by (as is the case here, though I found one tertiary source above). Nevertheless, my two cents is that the subject is "worthy of notice" or "note" through a verifiable statements capturing several subject-specific understanding (of the community) of notability, and should be kept with {{Sources exist}} if existing are insufficient for a BLP. The SNGs allow us to contextualize the requirements of WP:BASIC and avoid a renewed reinterpretation with every article. The use of 'may' in that language broadly captures that these policies are consensus driven and evolve, and thus it cannot (possibly ever) prescribe a definitive criteria of notability. — WeWake (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Worthy of notice would have more than just mentions or unreliable sourcing. I would agree a sources exist tag could be used, but that is assuming sources exist. They do not. All we have is what has been presented which falls short. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TKatKa

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

Not seeing how this group meets WP:BAND notability guidelines. LInks provided are just WP:ROUTINE or passing mentions. ZimZalaBim ^talk 22:34, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Sweden, and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 22:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Well, they exist, and have been played at least once on BBC Radio 1 per [32]. Apart from that, per the nom, I am unable to find any evidence of meeting WP:MUSICBIO. ResonantDis_tortion 07:02, 20 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 00:11, 26 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 delete‎. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:16, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maurizio Pisati

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

Before I edited this article, it linked to a youtube video, the artist’s website, a blog, and a place to order an album of his—all placed under the references section. The article exists in three other languages—commonplace for most older articles—and they all cite databases which sit in the authority control template on English Wikipedia, and are insufficient to make this article notable. Checking online, I cannot find other sources. Roast (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, and Italy. Roast (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - We are not MySpace. Bearian (talk) 00:13, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:NOTBLOG

Nixleovel (talk) 04:34, 24 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.

Gusti Irwan Wibowo

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN, At first glance it looks like a news site, it is not formulated as an article. Lobogamio (talk) 23:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 June 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Entertainment, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:26, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Lobogamio did you create an account just to tag this? @Liz: this seems odd? Thief-River-Faller (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --pro-anti-air (talk) 17:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails GNG and NMUSICIAN. The mere act of releasing an album is not a guarantee of notability, and I see nothing otherwise that would do so. As written, the article fails all 12 of the NMUSICIAN criteria. As far as GNG, of the three sources that are there, the first is a blogspot link, which fails RS. The second source only established year of birth and where he went to school, neither of which establish notability. The third source appears to be some sort of celebrity digital media site, and whether it's reliable is probably up for debate. The fact that this article is getting filled with sources that aren't establishing anything other than basic data, and was started by an editor who otherwise does nothing but make large numbers of small formatting edits (like removing middle initials from wikilinks), and has a number of edits that are causing the user to get talkpage notices tells me there's a potential WP:CIR issue here. 146.115.58.160 (talk) 17:58, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I don't doubt the primary claims about sourcing, I don't think your claims about the editor who created are necessarily accurate or relveant.

For example the claim about "otherwise does nothing but make large numbers of small formatting edits" seems not only an unnecessary attack, as AfD should be considering primarily the article. But it also appears inaccurate, as they are informed (on their talk page) that an article they have created is "in the news", which means I am unsure as to why you have decided this may be a WP:CIR issue (as the comments on their talk page suggest some level of comptency in creating articles). Emily.Owl ( she/her • talk) 18:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to get pedantic, the "in the news" was for an article the user updated (not created), and that update consisted solely of changing the infobox template used (for some unknown reason) and adding a reference to a Fox News article for date of death, which was subsequently removed by another editor. The user neither created nor substantially contributed to that article, and the rest of the talk page is full of warnings about infobox editing, contentious topics editing, lack of RS, etc. I would also note the user generally has no edits over 200 bytes in length (most of which are mobile edits), and when the user created Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, the actual listbox in the article says "space policy" (which I fixed). So I would say that yes, it's relevant because the user has problems with basic editing and proofing. 146.115.58.160 (talk) 19:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Uh? I created the article, I have over 1,200 page creations to my name, are you getting me mixed up with one of the other editors? I have never made random edits like the ones you are claiming? ....also I did not create Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy Thief-River-Faller (talk) 22:31, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify, I have been able to find some sources with English translations (of dubious quality but at least the gist can be understood) that provide some sort of analysis of his work (such as this one), although not being particularly involved in music specific articles and policy I am unsure if this would simply count as routine coverage or might impart at least some notability. The same news agency discusses what was intended to be his attendance to a festival and collaboration with other artists here, although this one I'm far doubtful of meaningfully contributing. As such, having excluded use of obituaries, I think that someone more dedicated (and who can read Indonesian) may be able to find further sourcing for notability, and thus draftification such that more work can be done may be suitable although I can also understand the reasons for deletion and hold no fundemental opposition to it.. Emily.Owl ( she/her • talk) 18:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Based on the new information added by @Thedisponible. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 23:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article as it currently stands is considerably different to when this was tagged, User:Thedisponible has improved the article. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 15:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to assess changes later in the AfD
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom, the subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN. Many of the sources cited are WP:PRIMARY and the ones that seem halfway decent (such as CNN Indonesia and the IDN Times) are WP:ROUTINE. There's not enough WP:SIGCOV to warrant an article in my opinion.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suffokate (band)

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

Repost of previously deleted and salted material: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suffokate * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:51, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:10, 14 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!} 23:06, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: There one album review, albeit a brief one ([33]). I also found enough Suffokate-related announcements to push the article just over the notability bar ([34], [35], [36], [37]). —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 18:06, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This definitely was a band and I think it passes WP:Band, but cannot find enough sources to verify the claims in the text. Nayyn (talk) 22:21, 25 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]

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 12:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO. LibStar (talk) 02:13, 26 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:26, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Proposed deletions

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

References

Bands and musicians

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

Categories

References