Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Nichols (folk/world)

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 delete. Coredesat 05:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joe Nichols (folk/world)

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/Joe Nichols (folk/world)
Joe Nichols (folk/world) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Asserts notability by saying he's known for his style; however, a search for sources turned up only information on the country music artist of the same name. Also asserts notability by two labels on Syphrus Music; however, a serach for sources on that label turned up nothing of note.

Also listing for deletion the supposedly non-notable label:

Syphrus Music (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 21:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I've already had this discussion with YoungAmerican. These pages have existed for years and were accepted up until recently. YoungAmerican had recently deleted the artists from the label but said that the label was notable. Joe Nichols released two albums on the label, meeting critieria for musicians and ensembles:

YoungAmerican deleted all artists affiliated with the Syphrus Music label, saying that "label notable, but all bands flunk A7". Joe Nichols has released two albums on that label. If the label is notable, then that artist meets the criteria:

Criteria for musicians and ensembles

5. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).

Responses from YoungAmerican were: The label can be mildly notable without the artists being noteworthy. I'm thinking that the label passes WP:CORP

So the label has existed for more than a few years, and has a roster of performers and releases. Only one of these performers has released two albums, but the total output of the label is significantly higher. Regardless of the notability of the artists who have only released one album, other editors have stated that the label is "mildy notable" and meets WP:CORP. Additionally, there are long-time labels on Wikipedia who have done less and have not been subject to deletion.

Kevingarrity (talk) 21:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

  • I see no evidence, however, that the label does pass WP:CORP, however; a Google search turned up nothing at all except for MySpace and Wikipedia mirrors. The number of releases isn't very relevant if no other sources can be found to verify that the label even exists. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe that the label's own website should indicate that the label exists. Additionally, the label had previously been known as Syphrus Recordings and a search for that term turns up different results. When the individual artists from this label were still included on Wikipedia, there were links to albums that had been physically released by the label. WP:CORP states that notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice." It is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance." Criteria of WP:CORP also states that "a company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject."

A search for the label and its releases turned up the following article from Blabbermouth.net (one of the top metal music news sites online) http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=76112

Kevingarrity (talk) 22:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

  • "Syphrus Recordings" didn't turn up any reliable hits for me either -- again, just MySpace and Wiki mirrors, or one sentence mentions at the most -- and just a one sentence ref does not warrant substantial coverage. I am quite familiar with WP:N, WP:CORP, etc., so you don't need to quote me whole passages. The source you cited is a two paragraph press release, which also does not warrant substantial coverage. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 22:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete Fails Notability Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 01:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The source I sited was an article published by an international news source. It does not appear to be a press release. I also don't understand how these articles were acceptable until recently. Have there only recently been changes in Wiki policy? The criteria WP:CORP is not "substantial" coverage - merely "coverage in secondary source". Brief mentions on a variety of websites or an article on an international news site may not be substantial, but they are in fact secondary sources which is the minimum criteria. Additionally, MySpace pages not maintained by the subject are secondary sources. We could also include sites that sell the albums in question as proof that they exist, but I was under the impression that it was not policy to link to vendor sites. I am also researching offline sources since Wikipedia allows for such sources.

Kevingarrity (talk) 02:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

  • They were "okay until recently" because nobody else thought them to fail WP:MUSIC. Also, MySpace is not a RELIABLE source (see WP:RS), nor are sites that sell the albums. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

So why does your opinion outweigh others? Additionally, the criteria in question seems to be WP:CORP not WP:MUSIC. The criteria for this is coverage (not substantial coverage) from a secondary source. By the way, regarding MySpace and vendor cites - this is why I did not cite those sources, but you seemed to question whether these albums actually existed and a site that sells it would prove that.Kevingarrity (talk)

  • Delete. Nothing on AllMusic for either Nichols or Syphrus. The only references provided are to a local weekly paper. Notability seems WP:LOCAL. --Dhartung | Talk 05:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete the musician. Perhaps my speedy deletion of this article was hasty, but I still contend that this particular musician flunks inlusion guidelines, per various points made by TenPoundHammer during this discussion. Weak keep for the label. It seems to stick a toe across the line of WP:CORP, but it sure could use some more high-quality sources to make that case. y'amer'can (wtf?) 15:10, 15 February 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.