Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy London

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. non admin closure Cenarium^Talk 22:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jimmy London

Jimmy London (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

This article does not see to pass WP:Band. Has a couple of unsuccessful albums on an idie record label. A google news search found nothing [1] . Also a PROD tag which was placed on the article was deleted. Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• DELETE For reasons above as nominator. Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment This AfD was previously tacked onto another one; I moved it. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep. Bad faith nomination in retaliation for the nomination of an article that he created. I explained the removal of the PROD tag. Jimmy London has had several chart hits in Jamaica and the UK, backed up by references, and albums on labels such as Trojan Records and its subsidiary Burning Sounds. Two good references demonstrating coverage in major works on the genre.--Michig (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Did not explain why he removed the PROD tag. [2]and [3] Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• "remove WP:POINTy PROD tag - plenty of releases on large labels, evidence of significant coverage" isn't explaining? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. I explained why I removed it.[4].--Michig (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy keep per Michig. Two sources in the article already assert notability; though the article needs major work, notability is quite clearly established in the article's existing condition. I say speedy keep per Michig's evidence that this is possibly a POINTy nom. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment poor references too Ijanderson977 (talk) 17:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Then try {{refimprove}}, not {{afd1}}. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 18:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

keep seems to be notable ^[1][2][3][4] --@ the $un$hine . (talk) 18:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment The only valid reference there is [5], the other three are not reliable or valid. Ijanderson977 (talk) 19:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. The references in the article, to published books by respected authors are both reliable and valid.--Michig (talk) 19:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• • so this person is notable under this reference [6] , so lets leave the editor to produce more .--@ the $un$hine . (talk) 19:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep seems notable. Dreamspy (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - nomination appears to be in bad faith. Subject is notable. Wwwhatsup (talk) 21:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Not Notable. Needs either re-doing loads or deleteing. 22:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djhayes383 (talk • contribs)

• Comment. The only other edits by this user are to their user page and communication with the nominator.--Michig (talk) 07:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, article establishes notability as per WP:MUSIC#C1. Appears to be a bad faith nomination.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 01:30, 31 March 2008 (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.