Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baby Consuelo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. — TKD::Talk 03:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baby Consuelo

Baby Consuelo (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable performer. No sources provided in over a year. Fails all criteria for inclusion (WP:MUSIC, WP:RS, WP:V, WP:N, WP:BIO). Valrith 18:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Forceful argument, Valrith. J-stan TalkContribs 19:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Fourceful argument?!?! More like flawed argument, Valrith says there has been no sources given in over a year... yet the article has not yet even existed for a single year! Also there have not been zero sources supplied over that time, ones have been added. Mathmo Talk 23:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, has magazine article and discography. More than good enough for a stub. Mathmo Talk 23:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment, Don't remove {{Uncategorized}} tags from uncategorized articles such as this, and don't add Amazon links. I'll assume it was good faith error of yours to attempt to add a source, but Amazon are not used as a reliable source. Crazysuit 02:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
      • Thanks for not leaping to unfair conclusions, and instead assuming good faith (makes a nice change from what I've been seeing recently....). I did indeed edit the article with good intentions, the article was already categorised (Brazilian music group stub). Thus it made perfect sense to remove an incorrect tag. Mathmo Talk 02:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable enough. --Belovedfreak 16:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Fails WP:MUSIC. The discography consists of nothing more than a single song featured on a 36 track compilation album. One article published on an online magazine in no way meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Victoriagirl 07:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Keep with thanks to Whpq for the good work. Discography more than meets WP:MUSIC. Victoriagirl 06:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Article does need improvement and better sourcing but singer appears to date back to 1966. Discography as listed here indicates a rather large body of work and on the Warner music label meeting WP:MUSIC for criterion 5. -- Whpq 20:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Just because it's a stub doesn't mean it's not notable. 5 seconds on Google: [1] Wl219 05:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
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.