Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting

Points of interest related to WikiProject Music groups on Wikipedia
Category

Points of interest related to Musicians on Wikipedia
Category - WikiProject

Deletion Sorting
Project

Project page	(talk)
Lists (by ABC)
Lists (by topic)

AfD: Today, Yesterday

edit · changes

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.

You can help maintain the list on this page:

To add a new AfD discussion (once it has already been opened on WP:AFD):

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. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You can also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Bands and musicians}}<small>—~~~~</small> to it, which will inform users that it has been listed here.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bands and musicians.

Please note that adding an AfD to, or removing it from, this page does not add it to, or 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.

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.

Relevant archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians/archive.

Purge page cache

Watch this page

Related deletion sorting

[edit] Bands and musicians

[edit] David Yonan

IMHO this conflicts with the guidelines in Autobiography, and it is written like an ad. See rev history and name of first author. But since it asserts notability, consensus must be reached. Shoombooly (talk) 01:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete It's written like an ad, indeed. I suspect it's a copy-and-paste from somewhere else. It is somewhat notable, though, so maybe with some cleaning up and referencing it would be worth keeping. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Notablity asserted but not proven. One new reference shows existence but not notability. Thetrick (talk) 01:28, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment. The reviews in reliable sources (embedded in the article rather than listed under the references heading) such as Tagesspiegel Berlin are probably enough to demonstrate notability, but since the search function at http://www.tagesspiegel.de/suche/ only covers articles since 1996, I can't verify the 1988 review of his performance. I found two references to him at the Google News archive and none at various Chicago-area news sites such as Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun-Times or PioneerLocal.com. I would expect to see more coverage of a professional concert violinist, but there may be a good reason for the relatively small number of references. --Eastmain (talk) 01:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 01:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bucium, folk rock band

I declined this speedy because it asserts vague notability (the talk page link for example), and therefore it can't be deleted via CSD. However the band does not appear to be notable, so I leave it up to the community. PeterSymonds (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Captain-tucker (talk) 15:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
DELETE, Band does fails WP:MUSIC, only one released album which fails WP:MUSIC#C5 and no other evidence provided or could be obtained through a quick google search. Note that the speedy delete was placed one minute after the article was created and the AfD placed 18 minutes later. The editor should be given some time to provide evidence of notability so as to not give the impression of WP:BITE. I placed a note on the editors talk page pointing to WP:MUSIC and others.... --Captain-tucker (talk) 15:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment - rather triggy happy nomination, 19mins after creation. Would like to hear from the author, plus give them a chance to expand the article before !voting. Paulbrock (talk) 17:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete: trigger happy or not, it fails WP:MUSIC. 19 minutes is not too fast for a speedy deletion nomination, why should this be different? -- Roleplayer (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

As per Captain-tucker, editor should be given some chance to provide evidence of notability. It would be nice if all articles were drafted first, fully referenced and checked, then moved to article space but that's not what happens, and speedying and/or AFDing before an editor has had adequate chance to finish what they were doing or respond to concerns is just going to put people off WP. Paulbrock (talk) 03:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 00:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Why don`t you wait for a few months and see if the notability increases, they will get reviews in the main sites in the next months, why hurry so much? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.76.131.76 (talk) 08:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Because you yourself admit in that statement that there is a chance that their notability may not increase. The best way to go about this is if their notability has increased after a few months and you can prove that using verifiable sources, then come back and start again. -- Roleplayer (talk) 12:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Team (band)

Their albums have charted on major charts, but they haven't charted any singles. Furthermore, none of their albums seem to be on major labels, and there seem to be no reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 15:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 15:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep I don't see why charting an album is any less an indicator of widespread popularity as charting a single. This is an underground hip-hop group; they don't pay to get rotation on mainstream urban radio, and yet still managed to dent the U.S. charts. Passes WP:MUSIC. Chubbles (talk) 17:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

How do they pass WP:MUSIC? They haven't charted a single. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

But they have charted an album Ben1283 (talk) 19:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep passes WP:MUSIC Ben1283 (talk) 19:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep, passes that policy aforementioned, specifically point 11. Granted this should be sourced. Also, The album helps their cause here. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] David Bianchi

Lots of David Bianchi's, but this manager and former band member doesn't get many Ghits, so I'd say he fails WP:BIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Weak delete. He played with some notable bands, but it looks like he was mostly a guest or touring musician, not a full-fledged band member[1]. Pburka (talk) 01:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Deletion tag has been removed. Vandalism? Rdbrewster♪♫♪ 16:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. Not in the history, so Twinkle may just have hiccuped. Clarityfiend (talk) 16:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete per WP:N and WP:V. Notability is asserted but cannot be verified without reliable, third-party citations. Happyme22 (talk) 23:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:51, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete number of Google hits is not a reliable metric for notability. However, I did not find significant coverage by verifiable, reliable sources. Willing to keep an open mind, if someone can find somthing.Cheers Dloh cierekim 21:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LaCUNAR (musician)

Lederer, the only member of the band, has dropped the label (from indie-rag newsletter pg 14, column: 6) and says "probably the name" as well. So that would mean he's even more of a nobody (no disrespect). Some time during this he had been working on a friends record; and working on "songs", which he says [according to the same article]: "Won't be for them [Terpsichore Collection], and I'm just going to be working on songs, and play some bars, and just keep working on friends' records."

Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 12:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Mercy Dolls

fails WP:MUSIC. awards are minor and for the clips creator, only one ep, claims of controversy are unsourced. Duffbeerforme (talk) 12:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Douglas Zol

Non-notable person, seems to be a hoax, google finds nothing TubularWorld (talk) 14:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete as per WP:MUSIC as it is about a non-notable musician and it seems none of the content can be verified with any sources let alone reliable sources and much of it is either original research or even, as TubularWorld pointed out, a possible hoax. AngelOfSadness talk 14:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Speedy delete. According to the (current version of the) article, this is a teenager (17 or 18 years old). At a guess, this is a real person, but the article fails WP:MUSIC. Earlier versions claimed notability, but these claims have been removed, so it could presumably be speedily deleted per CSD A7. --Bonadea (talk) 14:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Cannot be notable. Hardly believable. Some parts don't even make sense. ???? Rdbrewster ♪♫♪ 15:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete This is ridiculous. Makes me wish we still had WP:BJAODN. This is classic.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete Not a hoax, but completely fails WP:BIO, WP:BAND. Not notable, WP:SPA purported vanity article. WilliamH (talk) 18:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete. I can't find any sources to confirm the existence of this person, much less to indicate that he has achieved any notability as a musician. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hanako Oku

I see no reson that this person is notable in the english speaking world. maybe on the japanese wikipedia Sexy Sea Bassist 16:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The film The Girl Who Leapt Through Time was released in the US last year and the UK earlier this year... as a result, Hanako Oku's albums are available to buy now in English online music stores (such as Amazon) and in specialist music shops in England. If you look through the J-Pop and Japanese female singers categories in Wikipedia, there are many other artists who many are listed, that many English speakers will not have heard of... yet they are considered notable enough for inclusion in the English Wikipedia, alongside their counterparts on other language wiki's. Why should tyhis article be any different? David Bailey (talk) 16:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. -- Bláthnaid 18:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Notability does not vary from language to language, unless one wants to intentionally produce a culturally-myopic project. To my knowledge, a preference for cultural myopia is not yet a Wiki policy, or even a guideline. A quick Google News search shows this subject all over the place, including an article in Chunichi Shimbun [2]--dead link now, and not archived-- a constant problem in writing about Japanese subjects-- and mentions in major newspapers like Asahi Shimbun [3], Tokushima Shimbun[4], Nikkan Sports [5]. Clearly notable. Dekkappai (talk) 18:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep As Dekkappai shows, ample sources indicating notability. Edward321 (talk) 01:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep per Dekkappai. Proposing that only the English speaking world can adjudicate notability is a very bad idea, and seems to go against the spirit of WP:BIAS. Neier (talk) 13:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Team Blackout

Apparently non-notable musical group. (Page has been originally marked for speedy deletion, but the notice was removed by Gwen Gale (talk · contribs) who said that it wasn't a candidate - I don't see how the page asserts, let alone establishes notability, but since she suggested this venue, I am bringing it here.) It appears to have an AllMusic entry, but the page contains no information. Delete. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 16:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete The aticle does not (in my opinion) assert notability. I added the article issues tag in the hope that the article creator (or one of the other users to edit the article) might add sourced content to assert notability and expand it, and even though they have had plenty of time to, they have thus far failed to do so.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 17:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 00:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Francois Stamos

There is no evidence that this person is the son of actor John Stamos. Also the references do not match up with any of the claims. In addition, there is no notability. IndulgentReader (talk) 18:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete per WP:V and WP:RS. I can't find any evidence that there is a person by this name, that he is the son of John Stamos, or that he has done any of the things described in this article. None of the article's references mention this person. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Math and Physics Club

Non-notable band, doesn't meet the requirements of WP:BAND. I put a speedy tag on the article, the article's creator put on a hangon tag, and therefore another editor made the incorrect assumption that a contested speedy requires an AfD. But since the third editor removed the speedy tag, we have to come here. Corvus cornix_talk 19:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete Per nom. All significant contributions by a single deleted editor or anon with no other contribs. Related articles (albums, EPs) should easily pass speedy if this goes through.J293339 (talk) 19:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete - Non-notable band, only releases on a non-notable label. TN‑X-Man 20:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Labelmates of The Lucksmiths and Tullycraft. --Firefly322 (talk) 00:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- Being label mates of a notable band (and I'm not saying those are) is not a notability criterion under WP:MUSIC. Corvus cornix_talk 06:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep Doesn't the Popmatters Best Indy 2006 award and Pitchfork review constitute nontrivial third party coverage? Also, rename to "Math and Physics Club (band)" and set up a disambiguation page. People searching for "math and physics club" are likely not looking for this band. AfD hero (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- I guess that depends on what you mean by "nontrivial".J293339 (talk) 23:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  - It looks like the pitckfork review [6] is a pretty in-depth coverage, and pitchfork media are very well-respected music critics. Popmatters (also well-respected music critics) provide in-depth coverage in their review here: [7], and award the band "Best of Indie-pop 2006" here: [8]. I think these references pass the nontrivial bar by quite a margin. AfD hero (talk) 04:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
    - In case anybody else is unaware, Pitchfork is a webzine with no editorial policy and a reputation for covering obscure bands because they are obscure. You know that annoying guy at the record store that only listens to music nobody's heard of? That's Pitchfork. As for Popmatters, it's kinda tough to find any reliable info on them. So again, I guess that depends on what you mean by "well-respected". J293339 (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
      - What? Please cite your source. I seem to recall seeing an editors note in one of their reviews I read a couple years ago. Pitchfork is, for better or worse, the most influential review publication - print or web - for indie music. AfD hero (talk) 18:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
        
        You are the one citing Pitchfork as a source. I believe, in this instance, that the burden is on you to show that it is a reliable one, not an influential one. J293339 (talk) 19:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
        
        pitchforkmedia.com is linked to from over 5,000 wikipedia articles, most of these using it as a review source. [9] AfD hero (talk) 22:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep. AfD hero's point about Pitchfork Media is a fair one to make, even if influential does not always mean reliable. A quote from Time magazine ("An insider's guide to indie rock", p. 50, April 4 2005): "These days, influence resides in places like Pitchforkmedia.com, a website with the clout of Rolling Stone or Spin." Besides Pitchfork and PopMatters, the band has also had significant mentions in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and I've added those citations just now. In my view, it's enough for WP:MUSIC criterion #1. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Andrew Johnston (singer)

Contestant in a reality TV show. He lost the competition, and has done nothing outside of the show, meaning that all of the media coverage about him has been directly linked to Britain's Got Talent. As such, I believe that Andrew Johnston is not notable, as he famous only for one event. It is worth noting that despite the fact there are some articles for last year's losers (The Bar Wizards, Connie Talbot) the subjects of those articles have received coverage for events outside the show. Conversely, some of last year's losing finalists (including Bessie Curzons) did have their articles deleted. I also intend to assess the articles of the other finalists from the last series (including Faryl Smith and Kate and Gin) and possibly nominate them for deletion also. J Milburn (talk) 21:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Strong Keep - As with a previous nomination for Faryl Smith, it is very likely that he is to be offered a contract. If , in a few months nothing arises then I will be happy to change my vote in another nomination. Thenthornthing (talk) 21:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. If and when he does become notable in his own right, I would not only support the creation of the article, but I would be happy to help write it. Until then, I do not feel that we should have an article. J Milburn (talk) 21:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep as per the exact same nomination for Faryl Smith, and for the same reasons as given by Thenthornthing above, with the same proviso. Also, with regard to the comment about possibly nominating the Faryl Smith article for deletion, I should point out that it has only just gone through the AfD process, being nominated on 1 June with the result to keep on 5 June, just two days ago. With regard to The Bar Wizards, any coverage seems to link to BGT and all 4 references on that article all come from the first series of BGT. And certainly three of the sections, Company History, Forthcoming Projects and Tandem flair show read like adverts for them.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete per above arguments by Milburn. Losing a talent contest, even one like this does not make one notable. Might get a contract? Might not. Might not achieve notability either way. We can't have articles on people because they might become notable. Wikipedia s not an indiscriminate collection of information. If, someday, notability is achieved, we can create an article. cheers, Dloh cierekim 22:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete, per Dlohcierekim. WP:CRYSTAL, WP:MUSIC, WP:NN and WP:BIO. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 00:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete - He's done nothing whatsoever outside the talent show - you might as well make pages for every single contestant for every single competition ever. Sparrowgoose (talk) 06:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment I've yet to see nominations for other articles. Faryl's article had one, and was kept. Surely if you are to argue this then all the articles should be nominated the same way. Thenthornthing (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe if I had the time and energy. I simply don't want to go looking for articles to delete. If someone wants to bring an article for discussion here, and if I stumble into it, I'll have a look. Otherwise, not me. The keep arguments seem to be based on "other stuff exists". That's as may be. Dloh cierekim 13:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

As I said in my nomination, I intend to review the other articles and possibly nominate them. I wasn't aware that Faryl Smith was nominated earlier- I will consider renominating if I believe I can bring new arguments to the discussion, or if I believe that there were errors in the original nomination. J Milburn (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
CommentSorry but I have to reply to the comment, - The keep arguments seem to be based on "other stuff exists". I in no way based my vote on any such argument at all. I mentioned the result of the AfD nomination for Faryl Smith because it is relevant due to the reasoning given in that for the result to keep and both being finalists in BGT where Smith didn't make the final three, and Johnson finished as runner-up. If you wish to claim that the keep argument is based on "other stuff exists" then you could also by that same reasoning argue that some of the delete votes are because "other stuff has been deleted" which was also mentioned above. It would do no harm whatsoever to wikipedia to wait a short while, and see if this lad does actually have an album released or not through Simon Cowell. If not and he then drifts back into obscurity then fair enough, delete it.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 14:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I pointed out that others had been deleted in an attempt to preempt the inevitable 'but XXX was kept/exists!' J Milburn (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

'Additional comment Apoligies for a second comment. However, on the BGT website it states that Simon Cowells Syco Music company "will be talking to Andrew, Faryl and Escala at some point this week" (about recording contracts). As I said above do think that this AfD could at least be held off for a week or so, to see if he does get a record contract.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 15:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Cowell signed Talbot after the show, then dropped her. She remained non-notable until she was signed by Rhythm Riders. J Milburn (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

STRONG KEEP Oh wow. He lost the show. Just like Jason Castro lost American Idol and he still has an article. Oh dear! And Ron Paul isn't winning the United States presidential elections of 2008. Let's remove him. You can see my sarcasm. Obviously, the person who tagged was not well informed on how to use Wikipedia. I am very angered at how you people are behaving at this article.--Xxhopingtearsxx (talk) 16:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. Someone needs another look at WP:BIO. Losing the thing isn't the question. Meeting WP:BIO is. Some of us think he does, some think he don't, and others think he will. Also, I would recommend not editing or taking part in discussions while angered. It tends to cloud the reasoning faculties. Cheers, and happy editing. Dloh cierekim 17:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Esham

A little tricky, but ultimately I don't believe this artist satisfies notability concerns per WP:MUSIC. Aside from a brief stint at Psychopathic Records, his other labels have been non-notable. In addition, the article is unreferenced and is written in a generally promotional style. Associated albums to follow. Recommend Delete. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 01:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete all The musician, as prolific as he is, isn't the subject of any reliable third party sources and thus fails WP:MUSIC. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep the musician's page; he has a decent length AMG bio, so I'm sure there are more sources, and two of his albums were on Psycopathic. Therefore, he meets at least one criterion of WP:MUSIC. Not sure about the albums; perhaps merge those into Esham discography? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 14:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment I saw his AMG bio, but a google search didn't turn up any other reviews from reliable sources. If I'm missing something, I'd be happy to withdraw, although I would prefer to merge his albums into a discography page. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 15:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Delete albums and no opinion on the rapper. Too many album articles that are non-notable and wasteful. Chimeric Glider (talk) 04:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Keep all. I don't know where this is coming from: his albums have frequently charted on Billboard and he's got All Music Guide album reviews. It's inconceivable that further reliable sources don't exist on such a person or his albums. Everyking (talk) 10:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep. A somewhat POPULAR artist who i've heard on Z100. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.145.15 (talk) 12:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep The deletion nomination appears to have been predicated more on the current state of the articles rather than the inherent notability of the subject, which demonstrably passes WP:MUSIC. Chubbles (talk) 18:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Melanie Castleman

Non-notable songwriter. Was only nominated for a Grammy; unlike her husband, she didn't win one. No reliable sources to be found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 04:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 16:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
~~Delete~~ neutral I haven't been able to find anything on her (also tried under her maiden name) - apart from news snippets simply listing the Grammy award nominations for 2007. There's considerably more coverage of her husband, Robert Lee Castleman, although his article currently has no references at all. Not only did one of his songs actually win a Grammy, he's also a solo performer. Voceditenore (talk) 17:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment I think there is still a lack of non-trivial coverage of her as a person. Two of the three refs added to the article only mention her as the co-writer of one of the songs sung by the artist who is actually the topic of the article, e.g. Alan Jackson and Alison Krauss. The third does have a comment specifically about the song "Red Rose", but the article is only 174 words long and appears to have a one-liner for each of the nominated songs. Looking at the notability criteria for composers and lyricists, only two could possibly be used for a keep (only one is needed).

Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.
Has written a song or composition which has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers.

Does the Grammy nomination (albeit not a win) satsify 2?

For 1, the relevant criteria for a notable song are:

"Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable."

The single "Red Rose" was ranked 23 for 4 weeks on Billboard's Hot Country Songs. Does that count? Dunno. I'm changing my vote to neutral for now. Voceditenore (talk) 09:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Just now I've added a few references. I could not find an in-depth profile of her, but there are plenty of non-trivial mentions of her in articles about other people—enough for me to argue weak keep. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

All of the sources are trivial or pertain only to Like Red on a Rose. I still say delete. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 22:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Risking an accusation of being a sexist, I propose merge/redirect to her husband - Robert Lee Castleman.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

That works too. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 15:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Juan DeVevo

Per WP:MUSIC, "Members of notable bands are not given individual articles unless they have demonstrated notability for activity independent of the band." I can find no evidence that this person has any independent notability.