Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians

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:
  1. 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.
  2. 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.


Purge page cache watch
Related deletion sorting


Bands and musicians

edit
James Worthy (record producer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. As pointed out by Rift, the sources appear to be paid coverage, and the article appears to be written by undisclosed paid editors. See Talk:James Worthy (record producer)#Conflicts of interest. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:33, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antony King (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I've looked at the sources, and they seem to be mostly a mixture of press releases, interviews, or insignificant mentions, with only a few sources that aren't. A before search turned up similar. At the very least, the article needs to be stubbified; at most, it needs to be deleted/redirected/etc. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 23:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atsuko Kawada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete - my WP:BEFORE turned up no evidence of secondary sources with significant coverage. The corresponding Japanese Wikipedia page did not seem to have any especially substantial references either. I therefore submit that the subject meets neither WP:NACTOR nor WP:NAUTHOR. There may be better sources in Japanese, in which case I would happily rescind my nomination. SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Band Aid (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOPAGE. Band Aid is the collective name of the numerous permutations of celebrity musicians who have recorded and released different versions of the charity song Do They Know It's Christmas. Band Aid has never released any other song, just this one. Most (all?) of the information on this page is duplicated on the Do They Know It's Christmas article. All we're achieving by having two pages is to have the same thing explained twice in different ways. This article should be redirected to that page. Popcornfud (talk) 12:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unconvincing. That same guideline encourages separate articles if the first one gets too unwieldy. That's the problem with the song article, so it can be trimmed. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the problem with that strategy. Every single iteration of Band Aid (the band) is directly tied to each iteration of Do They Know It's Christmas. There's nothing to explain about the band that isn't also directly relevant to the song — they're essentially the same entities.
For example, the background detail — the reason why the band was put together — is also the reason the song was written and recorded. There would be barely any detail that would be uniquely relevant to one article and not the other. Popcornfud (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a good faith gesture, I acknowledge your stance but will simply disagree and will leave my vote and reasoning as they are. We'll see where the discussion goes. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nang Kalayar Aung (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable singer, as she has not even released a solo album or achieved any significant milestones in her music career. I could not find any reliable sources to support her notability, so she clearly fails WP:NSINGER. Hteiktinhein (talk) 06:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nang Kalayar Aung is notable within Myanmar, particularly in the entertainment and music industry. She has gained recognition for her contributions as a singer and model, especially for her work in Burmese cover songs, which are popular among local audiences. Her popularity stems from her performances at live events and her presence on platforms like YouTube, where she connects with her audience through her music​
Myanmar Models DB
.
However, her international recognition might be limited, as most of her activities are centered within Myanmar. Her notability is significant in the context of Burmese music and modeling but may not extend broadly outside these circles without additional global exposure. For someone interested in Myanmar's contemporary music scene, she is a recognized figure worth exploring further. Waiyantunoo (talk) 08:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nang Kalayar Aung appears to be a notable figure due to her participation in high-profile events alongside well-known celebrities. In the context you provided, she is associated with prominent actors and celebrities such as Htoo Aung, Alinn Yaung, Kaung Myat San, Banyar Phyo Pyae, and Tayzar Linn Yaung at the grand opening of the 10th branch of the Thawara Win Sein Jewelry Store.
Being part of such an event suggests her influence or standing within the entertainment or public sphere. Her involvement with such notable figures and occasions indicates her recognition in social or professional circles.
check here Waiyantunoo (talk) 11:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Symphony of Heaven (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The more you look at sources, the more notability seems to be lacking. Many are based on band members' own words via interviews. Some other sources include articles written by band members themselves. Once you see past the notability mask smoke screen, the notability of this band appears quite thin and below meeting GNG. Also, the article was created by an undisclosed paid editing user. That editor appears to have a COI with this article. Graywalls (talk) 06:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a situation I've occasionally come across where an album might be more notable than a band. Season of Death has some significant coverage from HM, The Metal Resource, and Teeth of the Divine. That last one is currently being discussed at the reliable sources notice board. I noticed the review is written by the site owner, which would mean that it can't be used for any biographical statements. The site owner is a reputable music journalist, so that does confer notability to the album. however, apart from the album reviews, most of the other stuff I'm seeing is either press release copy, interviews from unreliable or self-published sources (which are fine for verifiable statements about the band but not for establishing notability), or COI sources (The Metal Onslaught and Indie Vision Music). I am leaning toward merge with Season of Death.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:28, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

per discussion with Graywalls below, I agree that this does not need to merge with one of the albums. So in that case, delete--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:ABOUTSELF. "unduly self serving" is often black and white, but there's grey area in some cases.
For example, "first luxury boutique hotel in town" citing the hotel's page or "a 100,000 lumen flash light released in 2024" citing the manufacturer's website of a light sold for $10 on Amazon. The former is fluffing, the latter is likely objectively inaccurate. However, citing the hotel's page "is a hotel in town xxx" or the flashlight's manufacturer's as "a flashlight release in 2024" would pass for factual accuracy. In 99.99% of cases, that flashlight's page has no place being cited or mentioned AT ALL on Wikipedia though. I think WP:RS is a concept unique to Wikipedia. Much of the sources in Symphony of Heaven don't substantiate inclusion worthiness even if factually accurate. Graywalls (talk) 21:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Basic biographical facts and album releases are fine to cite to the subject and those affiliated with the subject. But, if attributable to the subject, they don't give the subject notability. Verifiability isn't the same as notability. The flashlight hypothetical is a hypothetical and isn't relevant here.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done)
That merge suggestion appears unsound though. I was only suggesting that be merged INTO this, because Season of Death is one of the many notability failing articles of Symphony of Heaven. So, that being merged into this would be reasonable if this isn't notable, but if they're both non-notable, then deletion is sometimes the sound option. Graywalls (talk) 23:20, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that I found three independent reliable sources for that album, it's notable--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we had an article on Battery Company Inc, and separate articles on AA, C and D batteries of theirs, merging individual product into the company would make sense if the company is notable, but if we only had sources to make the AA stick, I don't believe that's a right re-direct target. That's the situation we have here. Graywalls (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your analogy. The album is notable. The band is not (or barely is).--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't make much of a sense to merge the band into an album for the sake of saving cruft from a non-notable band. Their other non-notable albums would then re-direct, rather than merge into one of the albums. Though, my order of preerence would be Del->redir->m erge. There are three other albums, so this would be a situation where there's really no appropriate singular re-direct target. Like I said, it's like re-directing a non-notable battery company into their marginally notable "non-notable comany's AA battery" while there's an article each in existence for each of the company's battery size. As you can see, this is an illogical target. Graywalls (talk) 01:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, I follow now. Yes, I suppose I agree.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Waya Boy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable musician, disputed draftification. Potentially created by an author with a COI but no firm evidence so cannot be re-draftified without discussion at AfD. Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked sockpuppet comments. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dan Merrony.
Their are a few features from reputable sources from the country of the the subject but thier is evidence of online presence and the subject has been verified on several social media platforms hence consider editing the article that deleting it. Thanks Bobby Colhn. Dan Merrony (talk) 20:23, 21 November 2024 (UTC) Note to closing admin: Dan Merrony (talkcontribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
I think it should not be deleted, we should make some correction though Marvokayz (talk) 20:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC) Marvokayz (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Jason Masi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSINGER. Fails WP:SIGCOV. No indication of significance. Been on the cat:nn list for 10+ years and no coverage. No band article as atd. References are extremely poor. scope_creepTalk 13:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tomohiro Hatta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP. No indication of signifance. BLP prod removed. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 07:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The La Donnas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBAND. Been on the cat:nn list for more than 10+ years. No indication of significance. scope_creepTalk 08:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are they WP:MUSICRS references, as a lot of them looks small blogs and profiles. scope_creepTalk 15:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think any of them are blogs, but some of them are zines. Also I would have liked for the Allmusic review, for instance (and the Allmusic bio) to be a lot longer. Geschichte (talk) 15:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep sources identified by doomsdayer520 are a good start and Geschichte has found a number of reviews in a variety of sources, some of which are RSMUSIC. Sufficient presented here to presume notability. ResonantDistortion 23:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eva Kurowski (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO, WP:SINGER. No indication of significance.Single ref is a profile. Been on the cat:nn list for 10+ years, never been updated. No coverage. scope_creepTalk 08:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a lot to base notability on. It all seems to local news. The book may be notable. I see its published by Rowohlt which is an old established publisher, potentially an indication of a pass as WP:NAUTHOR. I don't think these add up to much. There is a couple of event listings and promo articles for the book. There could be more here though. scope_creepTalk 04:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Etty Lau Farrell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG, article is a biography of a person whose biggest claim to fame is being married to a notable musician. Sources presented are articles on Perry Farrell and Jane's Addiction (more than a few of which don't even mention Etty at all), primary interviews, passing mentions, etc. The sources with the most dedicated coverage to her here are a Forbes contributor article and a Wordpress blog (neither of which are in any way acceptable for BLP articles, see WP:FORBESCON and WP:WORDPRESS), virtually none of the others establish notability. Given the WP:BLP problems at play here, including numerous sections of unsourced content about the living subject, as well as the aforementioned WP:SIGCOV issues (which WP:BEFORE could not help alleviate, since most of the standalone coverage that a search could turn up is about her commentary on a single controversy from around the same period), this person is unworthy of an article. JeffSpaceman (talk) 00:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fleas and Lice (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable band. They have one CD on a possibly marginally notable label, but that's it. The previous AfD was from 2006 and it does not disappoint--"keep" votes range from "they toured intensely", sourced to the now-defunct band web site, to "I have heard of them and I'm not a crust punk fan do they must be notable". There is no secondary sourcing in the article and I didn't find any either using Google News--a regular Google search provides nothing but the usual hits for bands: primary material, Discogs, Reddit. Drmies (talk) 18:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ervin Nagy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not suitable for WP:N, he is not a known pianist in Hungary, there is no article about him in Hungarian Wikipedia. His name is the same as a famous hungarian actor's, so this article just makes confusion. Also a stub, and self-promotion, his personal website included. Only sources about him are not indepedent or just databases. He has a video in YouTube, with only few thousand viewers so far. Hörgő (talk) 18:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Sales (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about a session musician, and not found references to add. I do not think the existing references demonstrate that he meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NMUSICIAN. There is no obvious redirect target. Tacyarg (talk) 15:29, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funkefeller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a not-notable electronica producer. Of the article's 5 references, 1 is to their non-notable label's website, and the other four are all blog articles written by that label in a community feed. Also, he seems to have started the label himself the same year this article was written. The Wikipedia article seems to have long outlasted the artist and their label, all because they formatted five references that looked legit at a glance. Here2rewrite (talk) 14:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeriq (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. He is the still an up-and-coming artist who has not been gain significant coverage to warrant a separate article. Some of the sources cited in the article are just press releases, others are unreliable blogs. The only promising source in the article, The Cable Lifestyle, isn't independent of the subject.  Versace1608  Wanna Talk? 16:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 20:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warren Hue (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Relying on self-promotional press releases without significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG Pridemanty (talk) 04:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 05:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Home Town Hero (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, other than a biography ([16]) and an album review ([17]) by AllMusic, which isn't a lot. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Under the Influence of Giants, since three of the members were in both bands. toweli (talk) 21:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Davide Lombardi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A draft that was moved into mainspace. It's mostly sourced with press releases. A WP:BEFORE search failed. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV (barely). There definitely needs to be some serious pruning of bad promotional sources and writing, reformatting of the article, editing for encyclopedic tone, etc. However, there are four articles among the references which are independent significant coverage about Davide Lombardi; three of which are in the LightSoundJournal, which is a professional publication for light and audio engineers, and one of which is from an Italian media source. He works as a sound engineer for notable artists, so I am leaning on the keep side.4meter4 (talk) 03:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @4meter4 That's a valid point; however, a reminder to anyone else reading this that Lombardi doesn't inherit notability from the people he works with. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 04:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    His notability comes through his work within his business. From the references you can see he is one of the most successful people in his own business, hence the amount of interviews and big Artists names that employ him for major projects, similar to most articles with notable knowledge, but yet not in the mainstream of press like TV stars. if that makes sense? Fabrizio Di Ninni 1982 (talk) 09:50, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fabrizio Di Ninni 1982 Getting interviewed and working with big stars don't mean you qualify for a Wikipedia article (or, to speak Wikipedian, whether or not you're "notable). Of course, whether or not you qualify is separate from whether or not you're doing important work. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:04, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the point. The idea is to make notable to the mainstream, who is already notable, but doing a different job from music/movie stars or similars. I agree working with big Artists doesn't mean to qualify for a Wikipedia article, but simply proves his knowledge and notable position within business. There are many articles that are in similar position (studio/live sound engineers, producers, musicians). As example, looking at Antony King sound engineer Wikipedia article, who has similar (and probably less) references from the same independent coverage. This is good to expand knowledge of live sound engineering, as people like me that loves concerts and understands basics about audio, appreciates and follows what some of these people are capable to create amazing live events for us all. thank you for the discussion. Fabrizio Di Ninni 1982 (talk) 22:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fabrizio Di Ninni 1982 I've gone ahead and nominated the Antony King article for deletion as well; as I said in the nomination, at the very least, the article may need to be shortened significantly, and at most, deleted.
    This is why people are advised to not point out that other articles exist; the "other articles" they end up pointing out usually aren't that great, either. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 23:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete They are all interviews - and in trade media, at that. The other sources are blogs or references to events where the subject has worked. Doesn't pass WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. it is good to point out that as well as interviews, there are dedicated articles to Davide Lombardi and they are all from independent significant coverage Worldwide, USA, UK, Germany Italy to name the most relevant ones. We can see on Wikipedia similar subjects with less references from similar sources. Fabrizio Di Ninni 1982 (talk) 09:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 03:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably worth to mention his notoriety is acclaimed by being an international award winner from ProsoundNews, while also nominated twice from TPi Awards from TPiMagazine, by MondialeMedia. They are both two of the most prestigious international prizes in audio engineering. Fabrizio Di Ninni 1982 (talk) 10:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amie Jo Bishop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Came across this because of its use of paid/vanity coverage in the Bru Times News. Apart from that source, the article has two reviews in the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Although I take these reviews somewhat seriously, I think that reviews in one publication falls short of WP:NCREATIVE and/or WP:NMUSIC. There is also an interview in a source of uncertain reliability, and several citations to the discography of the subject. It looks WP:TOOSOON to me at best. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Not meeting GNG... Her instagram has a whole of 120 something followers and the lack of any kind of sourcing outside Arkansas shows that this individual isn't notable. I don't find anything about her music. Oaktree b (talk) 21:38, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The J-Gos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I do not think that this hyperlocal band meets NCREATIVE or GNG. I see one review in a hyperlocal newpaper, and little else of substance. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 06:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm torn on this one. On the one hand, we have many critical reviews in local press (many fromThe Argonaut in San Francisco and Venice Vanguard and Los Angeles Village View in Los Angeles) which arguably meet WP:SIGCOV and criteria 1 of WP:NBAND. On the other hand, the coverage is all to events which could be seen as too local (ie small venues, etc), and we should maybe not consider it significant on that basis. However, there's also the fact that the band randomly did make it on Papua New Guinea's national music chart which would mean it passes criteria 2 of WP:NBAND. In the end this throws it over to the keep side for me.4meter4 (talk) 07:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shakir Pichler (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article contains no reliable sources, has been marked as such for over 4 years. I've looked for sources but have been unable to find anything reliable or reputable, Google News, Newspapers and Books turns up nothing at all. Current text is likely original research, possibly advertising - suspicion they've been written by the person the article is about. Also question the notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halfwaywrong (talkcontribs) 13:12, 12 November 2024

Hi Starship.paint. and Halfwaywrong.
I was a bit surprised to see this page nominated for deletion out of the blue after its been online since I think 2007 or so.
There are currently About 1,570 results in google for "Shakir Pichler" in quotes and that's not including the extraneous ones if googled without quotes.
The sources are reliable - IMDB for example but I think it could do with some proper formatting perhaps.
I have edited it from time to time when others have added incorrect data as well as removing old social links like myspace from the days of old :) and this page is also linked on various other wiki pages band line-ups and feature films for example.
It's certainly not being used for 'self promotion' in any way but it is factual of someone who has made a worthy contribution to both Australian music as well as Australian and Hollywood feature films so not sure why it was targeted to be honest.
There are a bunch of other credible links I could provide when I have the time and I should edit the page to make it more up to date at some point.
Anyway, again, it's definitely not 'self promotional' just because I made sure it was factual.
I'd love some help in adding all the proper ref links (film credits) (Band credits) and things to make sure it adheres to any changing wiki regulations.
Thank you. Sexbeatrecords (talk) 01:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]



I am a high school teacher in Perth and Shakir was invited to be a special guest at our Montessori school last year to talk about life in bands and also all the films he worked on and appeared in.
To this day, a year later, the kids all say it was the best day they have had at school!
He showed parts of all the films he worked on as the action vehicles coordinator as well as the parts he also appeared in and then showed us all the music videos of the bands he has played in and then gave a drum performance and some lessons for the kids!
The students have regularly used his Wikipedia page for reference in various home-work and projects since. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.118.65.6 (talk) 02:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone wants to take a look at the sources added to the article since nomination?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:38, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - @Vanderwaalforces: - I reviewed all the links in the article as of this version. References 1, 2, 3, 5 do not provide WP:SIGCOV. Reference 4 is an offline book but based on Google Books, the book is a Chronological listing of popular recordings ... Provides information on how many times the recording appeared in the charts and the highest position it reached. It is unlikely that it provides SIGCOV either. This link in the article provides one instance of somewhat SIGCOV but only says that Pichler quit his band unannounced in Sydney, and his band cancelled their tour. The Who's who of Australian rock book is an offline resource and I cannot confirm if there is any SIGCOV. starship.paint (talk / cont) 14:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's not forget Shakir Pichler's own project "The Howlin' MoonDoggies" who are known world-wide and released THREE full length albums released internationally, 2 music videos played on numerous commercial free to air stations In Australia ABC, Foxtel Channel V etc, Numerous Triple J (Band of the week) and uni radio station interviews with him as well, and his songs being included in FIVE international compilation albums (I have so far only found links to 3 but there are more).
    OR his film career which is also extensive.
    For example, he was THE action vehicles coordinator in Australian film 'Jasper Jones' where he single-handedly sourced and even drove in many scenes, all the cars from the period (1960's) the film was set in, which is a huge achievement in itself, let alone all the other feature films he worked on in the same capacity, like he did for the film "1%" for example as well.
    I finally received a big thank you message via social media contact - He would like to thank everyone who has been helping source links and tidy up the wiki page. He is actually a Web Designer and said he wishes he could edit his own page (rather than the fumbling job I have done) but really does appreciate what you all have done over the years :)
    Shakir Pichler is a notable identity with massive contributions in both the Music and Film industry - Is this really still up for debate? Seems a bit strange. Sexbeatrecords (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As I was typing the above message I have just been sent a message finally from Shakir via reaching out on his socials.. He also just sent links to some newspaper scans etc which I have now added hopefully in the right place :) Please bear with me if the format isnt perfect and any help would be greatly appreciated so we can make this page good and hopefully put this vote to bed. Much love to the wiki volunteers. Sexbeatrecords (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually his project 'The Howlin Moondoggies' appeared on SIX international compilations and not 5. I actually have them somewhere in my collection I think, so Ill find the rest of the links when I can.. 157.211.92.236 (talk) 07:13, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In regards to the Who's Who of Australia Rock source - I've found a physical copy for sale, that shows it appears to be basically a list of the bands, members and discography, which I'd argue is not WP:SIGCOV.
    I'd also argue that Pichler's contributions to his bands are better served in the articles of those bands. Halfwaywrong (talk) 08:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Looking to the recent links added and they are still not good enough in terms of WP:SIGCOV. One is an undated interview from an unknown publication, apparently of Pichler's former bandmates, who said he quit the band and was beloved by fans before that. Two has a one sentence mention of Pichler, who is said to be part of a band. Three does not even mention Pichler explicitly. Four has a two sentence mention of Pichler and just says that he is new to the band (first time recording with him). Five I have covered before, just says Pichler quit and band ended tour. starship.paint (talk / cont) 08:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Put all this together regardless of if you deem the links 'reliable' (it was a long time ago so it's not easy to get new links obviously so even links that at least show the albums etc regardless of where the links live matter as evidence itself- with everything combined including the film work they are strong evidence of WP:SIGCOV
    this is looking like a bit of a witch-hunt to me and starting to wonder why he is being targeted when you need only look at the incredibly long list of achievements. Sexbeatrecords (talk) 09:28, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The albums and film work are primary sources and not independent of the subject. We would not count them as reliable sources, so there is no WP:SIGCOV there. starship.paint (talk / cont) 11:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How are they primary sources? They are not self-published either. If they were this page would be about me (Christine) and I am definitely no one. I don't really understand you point here.
    Also, despite you saying wikipedia's official film entries are not a reliable source's even though they independently reflect the same credits as imdb but all the films which credit him on imdb or links have been removed - they are not primary sources so its a bit of a lose lose when battling trying to show evidence of WP:SIGCOV! When things keep getting deleted or 'discredited'.
    Again I ask, please look at this holistically for the bigger picture.
    I can download and screen-shot every movie at the closing credits with Shakir Pichler's name on it if I have to. Or take photos of every album he has played in and bands he has fronted like The Howlin Moondoggies for example. I don't know what other hoops I can possibly jump to appease this pedantic return-fire.
    Identifying and using primary sources requires careful thought and some extra knowledge on the part of Wikipedia's editors.
    In determining the type of source, there are three separate, basic characteristics to identify:
    Is this source self-published or not? (If so, then see Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published sources.)
    Is this source independent or third-party, or is it closely affiliated with the subject? (For this question, see Wikipedia:Independent sources.)
    Is this source primary or not?
    Every possible combination of these three traits has been seen in sources on Wikipedia. Any combination of these three traits can produce a source that is usable for some purpose in a Wikipedia article. Identifying these characteristics will help you determine how you can use these sources.
    there have been countless radio interviews with JUST Shakir that I know of but can't find online other than the one I did find on youtube. And countless one on one interviews in paper and street mags over the years but unfortunately (I checked archives toay for Drum Media Sydney and Inpress Melbourne) dont go back far enough and miss by about 5 years. Sexbeatrecords (talk) 12:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And please remove that 'original research' warning as it really seems unfounded to say the least.
    this is getting way beyond ridiculous now. Sexbeatrecords (talk) 12:28, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:PRIMARY: Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved ... a scientific paper documenting a new experiment conducted by the author is a primary source for the outcome of that experiment. Pichler's albums are no doubt close to him. Pichler's films are no doubt close to him. Credits do not provide SIGCOV. I did not add the original research warning but there is so much unreferenced material in the article. starship.paint (talk / cont) 12:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
re 'seems self-promotional' - Shakir isn't promoting anything that I can find online other than his web design which is not linked here and his humanitarian work which is also not linked here - all of the info here is simply factual and historic. 157.211.92.236 (talk) 06:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Curious how you are aware of Pichler's humanitarian work. 157.211.92.236, curious how all of your 19 edits so far are all regarding Pichler. Curious how all of the 51 edits of Sexbeatrecords so far are all regarding Pichler, even including a 16-year break from Wikipedia broken by this nomination of this article for deletion. Curious how, at File:Shakir Pichler.jpg, Sexbeatrecords uploaded the image as the "copyright holder" of the "self-made" image whose author is "Shakir Pichler". starship.paint (talk / cont) 14:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Brent David Fraser (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE and added some references to this previously-unreferenced BLP of an actor. These are passing mentions, however. I do not think he meets WP:NACTOR, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Tacyarg (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Washington. Tacyarg (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Like the nominator, I was unable to find any significant coverage of Fraser, just cast listings and brief mentions in movie reviews. The closest to any biographical information was a Seattle Times movie review that added "Bellingham-raised" to his name (because it's local). (ProQuest 385333344) Not a notable actor at this time. Schazjmd (talk) 18:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Note, often credited as the shorter name Brent Fraser. Satisfies NACTOR with significant roles in Wild Orchid II: Two Shades of Blue (as Brent Fraser, and Dead & Breakfast. (When I am able I will add sourcing that verifies that). Mentions in reviews is an important part of judging actors. They act in things. That's what they are known for. That's the sort of thing that should be in encyclopaedias. Who'd they play and in what. duffbeerforme (talk) 05:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tararam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mostly unreferenced topic, with unclear notability. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:05, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:29, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Have you actually seen the Hebrew sources? "SAP Israel concluded a year"??? "SanDisk celebrates Bar Mitzvah"??? Every time they've played at a corporate shindig? Every corporate campaign that uses them? The article about "a unique internet campaign for Cellcom" doesn't even MENTION Tararam? No SIGCOV, no hit record, no chart placement, no major tour, no major media recognition. There's literally nothing here beyond a local ensemble often hired by tech corporates to play at their junkets. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mattin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources, and the external links in the article don't help establish notability (as they're either Mattin's website or interviews). Interestingly, the article was created by User:Mattata, whose only mainspace edits involve creating this article. toweli (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:05, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soft keep, I would be inclined to delete normally, due to the probable conflict of interest noted by the nominator, the sources shown by AllyD appear to display notability. -Samoht27 (talk) 21:31, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: one more relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JuniperChill (talk) 21:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs for this article:
Neon Hunk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I believe this article should be deleted for a few reasons; the first and most major is notability. I do not believe, at least as of this time, this duo is notable enough to have a page on Wikipedia. The article lacks sources, only featuring one that was put in the article in 2015. I've searched for sources to add to the article and can only find one article, a Pitchfork review, on an album they published, rather than the duo themselves. The article uses non-neutral language, such as "other noise/freak weirdos". It also contains a lot of unsourced speculation, stating that part of the duo is working on a full-length album, but this has never been published or confirmed by any source. Most of the wikilinks on the article go to non-existant pages, and no pages for the discography of the duo exist at all. This page has existed for years (since 2004 according to the edit history) and in that time, no verifiable and trustworthy sources have given notable information about the duo. Beachweak (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there's a Pitchfork review ([36]) and an AllMusic review ([37]). toweli (talk) 11:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These reviews are focused on an album created by the duo, Smarmymob, rather than the duo themselves. Beachweak (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, I was just noting the existence of two reviews. Leaning delete, unless more sources are found. toweli (talk) 18:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that under WP:A9, if the band/musician is non-notable and has no article, then an article for their album needs solid evidence that it has significance. I'm not sure if the few scattered reviews for Smarmybob will suffice. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How many would it need? As far as getting reviews go, it doesn't get much more significant than Pitchfork, and I think the other ones look very promising in sum. I'm somewhat struggling to take the proposition seriously that an album with Pitchfork, Allmusic and other reviews would be regarded as a speedy candidate. Geschichte (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my view, WP:A9 is there for a reason. An album article is not particularly encyclopedic when an interested reader cannot learn more about the band because they're not notable enough for their own article. That's my take on this side discussion about the album, and otherwise I am undecided about deleting or keeping the band and will have to leave it at that. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue isn't about the album; my proposition is to delete the page ABOUT the duo. In the future, there could be an article written about the album, but the duo Neon Hunk, at least right now, are not very notable source wise. If you review the article right now, there is one source that isn't very descriptive (and currently leads to a 404). Apart from that, the entire article is unsourced. I still think it should be deleted unless more sources about the duo are found. Beachweak (talk) 20:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was replying to Doomsdayer Geschichte (talk) 12:25, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 15:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:55, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaoli Isshiki (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. No significant coverage in any of the sources. Two of the three cited sources don't even mention the subject, and the one source that does simply lists her as one of several singers in a chamber choir (she is one of four singers in the soprano section). 4meter4 (talk) 01:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. 4meter4 (talk) 01:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan and France. WCQuidditch 06:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I looked as promised, don't know yet. Solo appearance at the BBC Proms is at least something. I added some external links to check out. Her repertoire seems off the beaten track, plenty contemporary, and we might want to support that. I found the ref from which most of the article was taken and reworded. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    adding: the French article has 24 references. I guess that some are those I also found (now in external links). Will look closer tomorrow, but someone knowing French might be more more successful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep: I haven't looked at those yet, but the English article is now referenced. For me, she is notable enough, having made interesting recordings, with notable ensembles and conductors, and only favourable reviews. She is not a diva-type soprano: that should not be a reason to delete. The article serves many links to music that is not normally in focus, both Baroque as contemporary. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For the French sources, I need help to not misread the French:
    1. [43] This Le Monde article says that she won a prize.
    2. [44] This is a more detailed review of her singing (not just "outstanding").
    3. [45] recital
    4. [46] recording --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gerda Arendt I don't think this in-depth enough to meet WP:SIGCOV. The last source is selling her CD and is not independent or significant coverage. The prod-s.com website also lacks independence. The Le Monde article spends half a sentence on her, and is a smaller not all that notable prize. The main prize went to another performer, Richard Rittelman, who deservedly is the focus of that article. Only the anaclase.com source approaches significant coverage (and honestly it isn't long enough to be considered in-depth as it devotes less than a paragraph of the article to her performance). Laurent Cuniot is the main subject of that article not Isshiki. There's not enough here to pass WP:NSINGER or WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO.4meter4 (talk) 21:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is Wikipedia only for those who win first prize? - This is a performer of several unusual recordings, and performances in Paris, Brussels, Proms, ... - Aldeburgh could be added. - Deborah Sasson was kept, but achieved less in the music world. She knew how to attract the press, however. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt This has nothing to do with the evaluating the worth of prize winners, but evaluating the quality of coverage of Kaoli Isshiki in sources. A half sentence of text is not significant coverage, and if the award were significant we would expect more coverage in independent media or academic publications. We can only build articles based on our notability guidelines which requires that we support articles with extant sources that contain significant coverage. That does mean that what journalists and academics choose to pay attention to directly impacts the types of articles we can create because we can't engage in WP:Original Research. That is both a limitation and a strength of writing on wikipedia. The fact that you have yet to locate any sources directly about Isshiki where she is the primary subject indicates that she isn't notable for wikipedia's purposes. This indicates that a journalist or an academic researcher needs to do some work before we can have an article and it is WP:TOOSOON for wikipedia to write on this person.4meter4 (talk) 22:34, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe that our coverage should depend on one reviewer's or academic's personal attention or lack of that, when her contributions to music are facts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then fundamentally you have missed the point of wikipedia's core policies at WP:No original research, WP:VERIFIABILITY, and WP:SIGCOV. We can't build articles largely verified to primary and non-independent sources. Best.4meter4 (talk) 18:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Informations about concerts and recordings are facts, not original research. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:PSTS which states, Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and avoid novel interpretations of primary sources. The issue here is that there is not enough secondary coverage of her performances and recordings to establish the notability of those performances and recordings, and to make sure the "facts" are presented in an encyclopedic and neutral manner. Building an article from primarily primary materials and sources closely connected to the subject does not match the policy language at PSTS. At this point we have found zero secondary or tertiary sources with significant coverage. That makes the topic both not notable, and any article built from the current sources in evidence a violation of PSTS policy on the no original research page. Best.4meter4 (talk) 21:15, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Please educate me on my talk, not here. - Edit conflict, response only to the beginning of the comment above.) I didn't write this article, and probably would not have created it. But now it's there. I don't think we need "research" to agree that The Proms are notable, and that singing all of Monteverdi's Vespers (not just solos) is an admirable feat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting policy language here isn't about educating you Gerda (although if it does that is a bonus). It's relevant policy language to the discussion. Providing textual evidence for an WP:AFD argument is what we are supposed to do at an AFD for the benefit of all participants. I have provided a detailed source analysis below, showing how none of the references constitute independent significant coverage as required by WP:Notability.`4meter4 (talk) 01:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, could you please notify relevant projects, such as Opera and Women (in Music, in Red), - Song is not relevant. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:48, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source Significant? Independent? Reliable? Secondary? Pass/Fail Notes
Le Monde  N  Y  Y  Y  N Non-notable award that receives only a half sentence of coverage in the article. The article is mainly about another person who won a different award which is notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Anaclase.com review  N  Y  Y  Y  N Article is primarily a review of Laurent Cuniot and the TM+ ensemble at the Maison de la musique. Isshiki is only mentioned in passing, and the paragraph she is in is primarily not about her performance but about the song cycle by Jonathan Harvey. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
recital at prod-s.com  N  N  Y  N  N The PROD-S company is the production company which produced the recital concert by Ishki. As they are a production team directly connected to the recital, and promote their events on their website this lacks both independence and significance. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
recording  N  N  Y  N  N Vendor selling Isshiki's CD. Does nothing but verify a recording exists. It does not provide any information on the recording, and the website also lacks independence as it is selling a product featuring the subject. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
KAOLI ISSHIKI at ruhrtriennale.de  Y  N  Y  N  N Artist bio at the website of Festival der Kunste which employed the singer. These bios are usually written by the subject or their paid talent management agency. Lacks independence. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Ensemble William Byrd  N  N  Y  N  N Isshiki is listed as one of four sopranos in a chamber choir on the website of the choir itself. This is either neither independent or significant coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
KAOLI ISSHIKI at ludusmodalis.com  Y  N  Y  N  N Artist bio at the website of the Ludus Modalis website which employs the singer. These bios are usually written by the subject or their paid talent management agency. Lacks independence. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Review at musica-dei-donum.org  Y  Y  N  Y  N Review from a WP:SELFPUBLISHED non-notable blog. Not a reliable source. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Philharmonie de Paris  N  N  Y  N  N Performance archive of the Philharmonie de Paris. Verifies she performed with the orchestra in a primary source, but this is neither significant or independent. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
BBC Proms  N  N  Y  N  N Performance archive of the BBC proms. Verifies she performed with the BBC proms in a primary source, but this is neither significant or independent. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Voce.de  N  ?  N  N  N Voce.de is a WP:SELFPUBLISHED personal website of Hans-Josef Kasper. Not reliable. May or may not be independent. No way to tell with a self-published source. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Brusseks Philharmonic  N  N  Y  N  N Website of the Brussels Philharmonic. It's the orchestra's performance archive and is both a primary source and lacks independence from the subject as the orchestra employed her. Can be used to verify the performance but is not usable towards proving notability. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Res Musica review  N  Y  Y  Y  N This is an independent secondary source, but Isshiki's performance is only given a half sentence of attention. It is not in-depth enough to be considered significant. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
conservatoire-orchestre.caen.fr/  N  N  Y  N  N This is an advertisement with ticket sale pricing and links for purchasing. It is not a review, not independent, and not significant coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
musicweb-international.com  N  Y  Y  Y  N This is an independent review of album on which Isshiki performs on a couple songs as a guest artist. However, her performance was not reviewed at all by the reviewer who did not mention her at all in the review. She is only listed as a performer on the couple songs to which she contributed. Without any text reviewing her work, this is not in-depth coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
French Anthologies  N  Y  Y  Y  N This is an independent review in a reliable secondary source. However, the review of Isshiki's performance is only a half sentence long. It's not in-depth enough to constitute significant coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
www.recordsinternational.com  N  N  Y  N  N This is the website of a record label selling one its albums. Not independent nor significant. Fails WP:SIGCOV.
Total qualifying sources 0
There must be multiple qualifying sources to meet the notability requirements
I am travelling, and busy with other subjects, sorry for a late reply. Thank you for diligent analysis of sources, 4meter4. My issue is that it sees every item only on its own, not in context.
Of course there are, in general, biographies around that were written by the person in question or by a publicity specialist, but in this case I see the things mentioned there (studies in Europe, award, performances, recordings) also supported by trustworthy other references. I also don't see any items in the biography (which is repeated by other sites) that I'd consider far-fetched or sensational claims.
I see a singer performing in high quality and in teams, be it ensemble or with other soloists. I like that approach. I see her performing the lesser-performed music, both old and new, and would like to showcase that instead of deleting it. As John pointed out (below), there are different ways to establish notability according to Wikipedia:Notability (music). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found this Amazon listing which has her credited on all but one track. The main artist seems to be Pascal Dusapin. Then I found that her artist page at Amazon has four albums listed, one of which is under her own name. Here is another listing, from the Ensemble Vocal de Pontoise.Wikipedia:Notability (music) says our benchmarks for a standalone article on a musician include "Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable)." Maguelone (her record label) claims to have released work by Reynaldo Hahn and André Jolivet, who are independently notable, and to have been around since 1993. Overall, (and the coverage of her prize in a major French media source counts too) I think that this artist (just) meets WP:NMG, so I think this is a (fairly weak) keep from me. John (talk) 20:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm giving this discussion another relisting. But right now, I see no support for deletion other than the nominator.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The SNG is tied to the notability of the record label. Albums made with an obscure small record label probably aren't notable. It's not like she recorded for a significant classical music label like Decca, Naxos, or Deutsche Gramophone which have international distribution. We don't even have an article on the label she recorded with which is telling. It looks to me like she is only active with a tiny French independent record label that doesn't appear all that notable. 4meter4 (talk) 17:49, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relisting. Comments on the sources provided would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 02:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reverting my close, and relisting for a clearer consensus, per the nom's request.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 19:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion

edit

Categories

edit

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

References

edit