Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Recht

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. KrakatoaKatie 06:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rick Recht

Rick Recht (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Single-sourced, non-notable musician. No hits, no sign of any real-world impact. PROD tag added but removed by User:Kappa with the comment "sounds like he passes WP:MUSIC", though I can't see the slightest way that's possible. Calton | Talk 15:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete or even speedy delete per nom. Utterly non-notable. Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 15:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. I found the AP story, and fixed the link to it in the article. While I'd like to see more notability, this is more than I see for 90% of the music articles. --Fabrictramp 15:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • One source? One wire-service story? And the condition of 90% or whatever of other music articles means nothing, unless Wikipedia has started grading on a curve. --Calton | Talk 16:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong keep Has anyone looked at the history of this article? The original opener,"Rick Recht is a Jewish musician who is especially known for his live performances for groups of youth all over the United States. He has released four jewish albums, one live DVD performance, and also three secular albums", was removed. He's also been featured in Newsweek and Christianity Today as a top performer in Jewish rock.--Sethacus 15:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Except there wasn't a sliver of a breath of a hint of whisper of a suggestion of this alleged fame, nor of anything resembling reliable sources except a single AP article. And you haven't actually come close to changing that with your changes. Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for every musical act on Earth to try and get famous. --Calton | Talk 16:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment A little more sourcing and I'd say Keep. The Newsweek article is certainly a good one. MarkBul 17:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep, barely enough sourcing for now, a couple of additional sources should do the job. Realkyhick 19:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Looks like 145 Google News Archives hits, some of them the AP wire story, but others from prior to that getting print in places like the Jerusalem Post and elsewhere. Indications are that he's toured nationally, and he's got a whack of albums out (though I can't find a record label to determine if it's notable). The coverage would indicate enough notability for a weak keep. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not Notable. Djmckee1 - Talk-Sign 21:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. There are several sources showing that he is sufficiently notable to meet WP:Music. Capitalistroadster 01:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per additional sources added; well done. Now appears to meet WP:N.--Kubigula (talk) 03:31, 8 September 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.