Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians

Shortcuts

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. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not 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. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

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. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Bands and musicians|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bands and musicians.

Further information

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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Related deletion sorting

Bands and musicians edit

Rick Burke (musician) edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(PROD declined with no explanation) Fails WP:MUSICBIO. What little coverage I can find featuring this person's name is about his bands, not Burke himself Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Mach61 14:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

San Jose Taiko edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While previously deleted for G11, this time the page has been written in a more encyclopedic tone. Unfortunately, there is just not any coverage that I can find. BrigadierG (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Martial arts, Japan, and California. BrigadierG (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References to published academic work demonstrating the significance of this organization to the art of taiko in North America have been added, as well as national recognition from the NEA for the original managing director and artistic director of the organization. 31N2024 (talk) 00:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ecko Miles edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I do not see enough evidence to establish WP:NMUSICIAN. Some sources are unreliably having a close connection to the subject, some are WP:ROUTINE coverages announcing founding of Daed Empire, most are PRs, announcing collabo or music release, etc. Fails WP:GNG in a nutshell. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Nigeria. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bongofari edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Apart from lacking sources to reliable sources, the article doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Artists, Bands and musicians, Africa, and Ghana. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gemma Khalid edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Significance for WP:BIO is not visible.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 03:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added some references from the corresponding article in Russian. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 16:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Danila Kashin edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:SINGLEEVENT. The remaining sources are news articles. Skepsiz (talk) 18:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Skepsiz (talk) 18:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Internet, and Russia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of best-selling music artists edit

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It is not possible for anyone to record how many records of a particular artist have been sold nationally or internationally. Now even if we were to mention only what WP:RSs have said, then this list would be among those articles that fail that requirement the most.

This list is nothing but a WP:LISTCRUFT. This list has been probematic to core. Various RfC have been carried out but there has been no solution for this list.[3][4]

As noted by the reliable sources, Elvis Presley, The Beatles are widely regarded to have sold more than 1 billion records,[5][6] while Michael Jackson has sold over 750 million records.[7] However, this page is evidently misrepresenting their figures.

This list does not make mention of Bing Crosby who is known to have sold over 900 million records.[8] Could it be because Crosby does not have enough fans who are eager to impose their POV on this page? That appears to be biggest factor behind the names (at least the top ones) found on this list.

Not just that, but this list does not even list any artists from the most populated countries like India and China where some artists have clearly sold more than 200 million records such as A. R. Rahman,[9] Wei Wei [10] and more.

It would make more sense to have this list deleted instead of wasting any more time on it. Ratnahastin (talk) 16:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Lists of people. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Hundreds of Wikipedia articles mention total sales figures of music artists and bands, so it can be asserted that the existence itself of this List is more than coherent. Apart from that, it contains very valuable information for the reader, such as the total amount of certified sales of each artist/band, with numerical (ergo, objective) data from multiple music certification systems of different countries/markets.
The claimed sales figures, even if they are estimates, are supported by RS from news organizations (as stipulated in the List's guidelines). It is true that there are sources that claim the figure of 1 billion records for The Beatles [11], Jackson [12] and Presley [13], but there has been a consensus for years not to include such high figures as they were considered inflated.

In those two RfCs mentioned above, the total deletion of the List was never considered, but rather had the objective of improving it, especially the last one, which modified the methodology previously used in the List, removing its percentage-based fabricated requirements (which were defended by the user Harout72, who incurred in WP:OWNERSHIP and decided to cease his activity on Wikipedia when he saw that the methodology he defended was going to be changed). These changes, results of a voting, make it now possible to include artists like A. R. Rahman or Wei Wei. It is true that perhaps it should have been done earlier, but there is certainly a consensus to do so. Indeed, you can see on the List's Talk page that we have been discussing the inclusion of these artists this week.
Salvabl (talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct

Apple Corps, the record company that owns the Beatles stated the group had sold 600 million records which predated this article as they were listed at 1 billion at the time.

"Apple Corps Ltd. was founded by The Beatles in 1968 to look after the group’s own affairs. The London-based company has administered the catalogue of The Beatles releases of the 1960s that have sold to date more than 600 million records, tape sand CDs." [14][15][16]

For Elvis Presley, his record company Universal Music Group states that he has sold 500 million records to date "Widely acclaimed as the best-selling solo music artist of all time, Presley has sold more than 500 million records and holds the distinction for most songs charting on Billboard's Top 40 with 114 hits". [17][18]

For Michael Jackson, Sony Music Group stated he had sold 750 million records around the time the Beatles were claimed to have sold 600 million records [19][20]

This page as such is largely accurate barring a few outdated references. Never17 (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Keep: there's literally no reason to delete this article. We already reached a consensus from various editors to improve the page. Also Elvis Presley is claimed to have sold 500 million records Reuters (2022) - 500 Million , along with The Beatles NME (2024) - 500 Million and Michael Jackson Yahoo (2024) - 500 Million. This article is also far more reliable than the list of best selling authors page and generally one of the most well put together on the website and has been cited by Guinness World Records and various other media outlets
Never17 (talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - an article not yet being "good enough" is not alone reason to delete it. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 22:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As per above, the article just needs better sourcing and the topic has many reputable sources on it already. Sharrdx (talk) 02:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, the credibility factor is of utmost importance. It is as you stated problematic. If readers dispute the validity of this list in any format, then we have a problem, for we have no credibility. You mentioned Bing Crosby? Since 1926 and beyond, it is believed that yes, as you stated, that he may have reached that astronomical figure of what 900 million? and yet, where is he on the list? Where is Nana Mouskouri? Who sings in multiple languages and most importantly, according to an extensive number of sources she has sold over 350 million albums worldwide, and globally speaking, she is considered the best-selling female artist of all time. She is also nowhere to be found on this list. Moreover, other entertainers who I have mentioned in the past who are nonexistent in this list/article are Rocio Dúrcal, Rocio Jurado, Charles Aznavour, Roberto Carlos among the notables, who are not accorded in unit sales and are erroneously missing. All these artists have sold millions of units internationally. Also, for improvement purposes are some of the record claims, which are also dubious. Most notably, Julio Iglesias who in just about all websites and reputed reliable global sources establish him in the echelons of 300 million records sold globally and not the 150 million claimed by the Wikipedia article. I could go on and on with example after example stating without reservation that yes, we perhaps have a credibility problem. However, we can make adjustments and improve these omissions.

Case in point: there are other entertainers' who are also European descent and should never be omitted from this list or any list, such as the legendary Spanish singers (Raphael and Camilo Sesto), but for reasons unbeknownst to many, there are not. Furthermore, add to this credibility problem the Elvis Presley and Beatles factor; Without question and with respect to those who state that their sales are inflated, they are just too many sources being indicative that these two acts have easily surpassed the billion mark in sales. So, with all these examples that are obviously flawed, do I think that this Wikipedia list/article should be eradicated or faced deletion? No!! No!! No!! we must work to improve it. We have knowledgeable contributors previously mentioned who can make the proper adjustments and corrections to this list/article so it can be the very best it can be, to the perfected core. I for one, believe in the collaborations and countless contributions of these very capable writers/editors and users who I have previously mentioned in the past. In closing, I share the sentiments of these users and contributors who want to keep it. Let us not delete this article for not being good enough but improve on it so it could be more than just good enough. It could be the envy of all other website articles, due to its authenticity and factuality. Let's make it work!! Victor0327 (talk) 03:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Absolutely a listcruft and is used for POV pushing. I don't see a List of best selling authors. Orientls (talk) 06:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of best-selling fiction authors 170.203.201.93 (talk) 14:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for reasons already said above. Breaktheicees (talk) 08:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Per all the reasons stated above by multiple users. — Tom^(T2ME) 11:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reliable sources give ample coverage of the bestselling musicians, this something notable they mention. You can use the talk page to discuss any editing that needs to be done if you believe someone should be added or information is outdated. Dream Focus 12:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - seems like all of the objections in the nomination statement can be overcome with editing. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think there is doubt over the list that it is being used simply for promoting particular fans' POV. The main articles of these artists already have details on how many records they have sold. I don't see why this list is needed. desmay (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zaira Meneses edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article does not meet the notability guidelines outlined in WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. It was accepted through AfC by an inexperienced user. The reference to The New York Times is merely a passing mention and is behind a paywall. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, and Mexico. Hitro talk 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - I have added in citations and removed statements where I could not find reliable sources. I think the best coverage of her work is here.^[1]^[2]^[3] As noted above, the New York Times article also includes a few sentences on her performance in New York; I think that this is an acceptable citation even if it is behind a paywall or available at ProQuest. DaffodilOcean (talk) 11:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My mention of the paywall was merely for informational purposes and not to express any opposition to the source. Whether behind a paywall or freely accessible, a good reference is always valuable. Hitro talk 11:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Shaw, Punch (2008-05-24). "Guitarists' concert is well worth the wait". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. pp. A16. Retrieved 2024-05-17.
^ Siegel, Steve (2013-10-06). "Music is family affair for guitarist Eliot Fisk". The Morning Call. pp. [1], [2]. Retrieved 2024-05-17.
^ Small, Mark (2021). "An Afro-Cuban Legacy". Acoustic Guitar ; San Anselmo. No. 331. pp. 30–33 – via Proquest.

Jupither edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Band fails WP:GNG, WP:NBAND, WP:NMUSIC. No WP:SIGCOV in reliable and independent sources. Sources cited in article are (1) primarily about the lead singer, incidentally referencing the subject; (2) AllMusic which is of disputed reliability (and in any event is a single paragraph); and (3) a primary source. WP:BEFORE search turns up nothing else to support notability. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 12:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Light Records edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Don't think this satisfies the notability guideline. The second source literally leads to the Billboard Pro home page, so it doesn't help at all. I can't check the first source because I'm currently at a school where the link is blocked, so someone should check that. My Google searches on Light Records yielded nothing useful. TheWikiToby (talk) 18:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Albums and songs, Music, and Companies. TheWikiToby (talk) 18:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have repaired this nomination, which had malformed syntax that was transcluding Wikipedia:Notability and thus breaking {{subst:afd2}}. No opinion or comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge. Several possible merge targets here, including its founder, its co-venture partner, and its parent label. I suspect there is coverage of this label in Christian-interest magazines, though; a little digging by specialists might turn up more WP:ATD here. Chubbles (talk) 06:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kill the Scientist edit

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This band pretty clearly does not meet the notability criteria for musical groups. The reviews are all for a split seven-inch record they did with three other bands. That is not significant coverage. Back at that time, you could get reviews in these type of publications by simply mailing them a copy of your release. It is not indicative of anything beyond that. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 17:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 17:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Only Maximum Rocknroll out of the four sources cited seems to be qualified as WP:RS. However, it is still a brief review of one of the band's albums and does not demonstrate their notability. I did some online searches, but nothing related to the band comes up. It doesn't even qualify for WP:GNG.—Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 20:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Reviews are just trivial mentions, not even close to SIGCOV. JoelleJay (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Reviews are brief mentions in mostly unreliable sources not cited properly and I could find no other coverage. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daria Zueva edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Significance for WP:BIO is not visible. Typically, articles in other language sections were made by the same participant with the only interest in Wikipedia in the form of creating articles about this person.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 01:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, Television, Theatre, Netherlands, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In addition to the apparent COI, all the film and TV roles appear to be bit parts, except for the short film. I'd say WP:TOOSOON. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No news coverage about the subject.--Meligirl5 (talk) 10:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. After my own research, I second Ssilvers's analysis. Can add that there are some sources [21][22] but not independent enough for the GNG. The professional guideline isn't met either. gidonb (talk) 17:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think the the sources identified by Gidonb are valid and establish notability through GNG. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 07:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quick Delete. Typical cross-wiki advertising/spam, fake sources (paid articles), does not match WP:BIO. On ru.wiki same article deleted, creator became the subject of a request to CU. Кронас (talk) 19:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deuces Wild (band) edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2009, and for a seemingly valid reason — a quick internet search revealed more results for a "Deuces Wild" tour done by a completely separate musical group than this band. One of its members, Stefan Zauner, already does not seem to be notable by Wikipedia standards.

The article already briefly discusses the subject's relative inactivity with its one album and two singles, neither of which were apparently successful. To me, this does not signify any importance or inherent notability as per WP:BAND while its understandable lack of coverage clearly fails WP:GNG. AviCapt (talk to me!) 03:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany. AviCapt (talk to me!) 03:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Münchener Freiheit (band), where Deuces Wild is already mentioned briefly as a minor side project. That's all that is needed here because the side project achieved no notice of its own. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Münchener Freiheit (band): Agree with Doomsdayer520. It is only a non-notable one-off side project of a clearly notable band. A similar example that comes to mind is the Taiwanese band Sodagreen/Oaeen, where Oaeen is currently redirected to Sodagreen.—Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 20:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marilyn Faye Parney edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a musician, not properly sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. The strongest claim of notability here is that she got nominations/wins from a minor regional music award that doesn't fulfill NMUSIC #8 (that's looking for top-level national awards on the level of the Junos or the Canadian Country Music Awards, not just the Saskatchewan Country Music Awards) -- and otherwise, this is written more like her self-published marketing materials on a primary source than a proper encyclopedia article, making it unsurprising that the only footnote present here is to her own self-published marketing materials on a primary source.
And on a WP:BEFORE search of proper media archives, I'm not finding much to salvage it with -- I found a few hits of "local woman does stuff" in Saskatoon's local media, but nothing that would support a meaningful notability claim under NMUSIC, and mainly I just found concert listings.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to get over GNG on the sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 19:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 19:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't even find mention of her in media sources, no album reviews; I don't think the regional music awards give her notability here in wiki. I can't find album reviews or any critical coverage of her music. Best I could find was a performance listing at Expo in Japan in 2005 or 2007 [23], see page Q... This appears PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 20:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: She appears to have been active in the 1990s, so it's hard to find sources. Library and Archives Canada has this [24], she seems to have been featured on a CBC television item back in the 1990s, but I have no information of how extensive it is... Oaktree b (talk) 20:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Tried searching .ca and .jp websites, only have confirmation of her performance at the Expo in Aichi, Japan. Oaktree b (talk) 20:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete She doesn’t seem to have the necessary sources and coverage, but I’m open to keeping the article if those sources can be found. Go4thProsper (talk) 18:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Plummer (musician) edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a musician, not reliably sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. The only properly verifiable claim of notability here is that he existed -- it asserts that he had hit singles, but fails to provide any verification of where they were "hits" (spoiler alert, not in RPM). And for "referencing", it just contextlessly bulletpoints a list of mostly primary source websites that aren't support for notability, without footnoting anything in the article body to any of them.
On a WP:BEFORE search, further, I didn't find enough coverage to salvage this -- apart from one concert review in The Globe and Mail on the occasion of him playing the El Mocambo in 1980, I otherwise only get local coverage in Saskatoon, glancing namechecks of his existence in sources that aren't about him in any sense, and tangential hits for other unrelated Brian Plummers (such as Bill Pullman's character in The Equalizer).
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have more and better sourcing than he has. Bearcat (talk) 19:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 19:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: it looks very much as though this was written as a WP:NOTMEMORIAL... the only other edit the article creator has made to Wikipedia is to add some information about Jack Hazebroek to the article about the Rolling Stones Mobile Studio, and Hazebroek's name also appears in this article, so I imagine it was written as a tribute to Mr. Plummer, having worked with him. Richard3120 (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Azealia Banks' controversies edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I believe this article (a borderline attack page, which has had some material suppressed) is an unnecessary fork from Banks' main article and goes against the spirit of our biographies of living persons guideline and gives undue weight to very minor internet controversies and brief spats (see also: WP:COATRACK). There may be reliable sources on some of Banks' various feuds, but not every single one of them needs to be recorded per WP:NOTNEWS; especially given how Banks has attacked and criticized most mainstream celebrities at this point. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 14:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Popular culture. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 14:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A lot of is poorly sourced, unencyclopedic, and tangentially, giving air to the Internet rants posted by a woman who is better known for her feuds than her music at this point. Ss112 00:40, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The nominator nailed all the relevant policy violations. The fact that Ms. Banks is always in a beef with someone is already described adequately at her main article, and a list has no encyclopedic value. The Disputes and controversies section at her article could be cleaned up too, with a general summary rather than a few isolated examples. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:51, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Henrik Karlsson (musicologist) edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:NCREATIVE. Clear friend a ^💬 22:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Bands and musicians, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Probably meets WP:AUTHOR, I easily found several reviews of his 2013 book. Quickly added them, though several are paywalled. Geschichte (talk) 09:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'd like to see more than one book for WP:AUTHOR but Royal Swedish Academy of Music might be a pass of WP:PROF#C3. It depends on whether it is for music scholarship (likely in his case) or performance (also prestigious but not really academic notability). —David Eppstein (talk) 17:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Also ping Mscuthbert as our in-house music scholarship expert. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- my sense is that the membership in Royal Swedish Academy of Music would be a WP:PROF#C3 qualification (membership in a very rigorously chosen and prestigious academic society). There are four academics (or five if the society director is included) in the list of 177 current members, among 800ish since the founding in the 1770s, suggesting that at least one society considers him among the top handful of music academics in Sweden. I don't personally know his work, but I haven't really studied Swedish music history, which is his specialty. But he is the author of the plurality(? majority?) of the articles on Swedish music in the New Grove 2001 encyclopedia, meaning he had enough reputation by then to be a significant authority. I think that to the extent that the Academy does appoint researchers as members, it is in that capacity an academic institution; the American Academy of Arts and Sciences appoints some non-academic musicians and screen actors as well, but its appointments of academics are considered as WP:PROF#C3. (I was convinced of a Keep before I looked at WP's coverage of Swedish academics in music. A delete here would be 20% of the living people in the category). -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 07:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(And thanks for the Ping David Eppstein!) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 07:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feli Ferraro edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG, coverage is limited to passing mentions and professional profiles in non-independent sources. The listed song credits are misleading, as she is not the primary recording artist of any of them; professional songwriters do not typically receive the same level of coverage for their work, and should not be presumed notable on the basis of having collaborated on notable works in the absence of actual RS coverage about their influence on the work. Searching online did not turn up any coverage better than what is already cited. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 16:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Women. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 16:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Astronauts of Antiquity edit

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BAND. Official website no longer exists, and band seems to have been inactive since ~2017. B3251 (talk) 15:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. B3251 (talk) 15:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Few results when looking for coverage (only a couple of interviews and what looks to be a paid piece). Clearly not notable enough to have a page. Why? I Ask (talk) 16:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California, New York, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blanche Finlay edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSINGER, WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and Jamaica. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agree with nom. Fails WP:GNG.MaskedSinger (talk) 11:39, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Raymond (pianist) edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing on this guy but articles about a student of his, fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. Allan Nonymous (talk) 18:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Forshee edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Bio of a composer/academic fails GNG, NBIO, NACADEMIC, NMUSIC. The independent sources do not show WP:SIGCOV; WP:BEFORE search turns up no other reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage or evidence of notability under any of the other SNG guidelines that might apply. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Bands and musicians, France, California, Colorado, Michigan, New York, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- composer/researcher doing good things to advance his career that are pretty typical for composers at this stage. Significantly TOOSOON at this point. On the non-academic side, lacking the awards or major ensembles (those not dedicated to producing student work) to pass notability; on the WP:PROF side, does not have academic appointments or the sort of extensive influence to pass there. (Some of the journals are important in the field, but book/CD reviews are not articles.) -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are mostly fair points. Not sure what the "TOOSOON" means--too soon to have a wiki article? Regarding academic appointment, a Google search shows that Forshee was a visiting professor and now instructor. As to the ensembles performing Forshee's compositions, the Callithumpian Consort and Trio Kobayashi are, according to their own websites, not dedicated to performing student works (they list Elliott Carter, Schuittke, Huber, Scelsi, Cage, Lachenmann, Richard Barrett, Jürg Frey, Larry Polansky, James Tenney, basically all widely known composers on the international scene). The articles by Forshee don't appear to be book reviews or CD reviews, but neither do they appear to be rigorous scholarly research articles; they seem to be somewhere in between: interpretive analytical essays? The one in Computer Music Journal is an early review of software by the pioneering computer music composer Trevor Wishart. Part of the motivation for this article is that Forshee is one of the few notable (or borderline notable) students of composer Anthony Davis, who just had his Met Opera premiere of his Malcolm X this season. Dolemites (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability cannot WP:INHERITED from Anthony Davis or anyone else; for each subject it must be established independently according to the criteria. No articles by Forshee can be used establish his notability, only what independent and reliable sources have to say about him with "significant coverage." Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marko Farion edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet the threshold of WP:SINGER, WP:NMUSICOTHER, or WP:ANYBIO. Online searches, including through JSTOR and newspaper archives, turn up no WP:SIGCOV. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Medicine, and Ukraine. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Zero coverage for this fellow, even what's used now isn't really enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Michigan and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reign in Slumber edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a band, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. The main notability claim being attempted here is that one of its members was previously associated with a different band, which is not "inherently" notable without WP:GNG-worthy sourcing -- but seven of the 16 footnotes here (close to half) are the band's own self-published content about itself on their own website or Bandcamp, which is not notability-supporting sourcing as it isn't independent of them, and the other nine aren't coverage about this band, but either glancingly mention this band in the process of being about something else, or are completely tangential sourcing about people associated with this band doing other unrelated things that have nothing to do with this band, none of which helps to support this band's notability either.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have much, much better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Cambodia. Bearcat (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reign in Slumber, is truly metal music band in Cambodia. this sub genre in it's very very rare find better sourced than this to support with their action. Without fund and most people came there just looking for free music during the music in Cambodia just built-up. Ten years they're struggle to survive, without them this sub genre will disappear in Cambodia. Please consider to accept my reason. Thanks JammyKH (talk) 21:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If having a wikipedia article helps them survive, that's PROMO and not helping us keep the article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not exist as a public relations platform to help emerging bands build their careers — making it big comes first and then the Wikipedia article comes second, not vice versa. Bearcat (talk) 13:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just improved some info and add more better sourced. Thanks JammyKH (talk) 22:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Source 22 is the only one that's in what Source Tool identifies as a RS, but it's a very trivial mention. This is about the band [25], trivial coverage and I'm unsure if it's even a RS. Oaktree b (talk) 23:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In cambodia, for a small subgenre music not getting any interest at all, Only POP, Hip-hop, Romantic and Khmer Traditional that's people acceptable. Metal in Cambodia is about to die. Reign in Slumber is real, they exist, they have the real music, real album and real performance.[26] [27] Camboculture27 (talk) 03:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The notability test doesn't hinge on whether or not they're real, it hinges on whether or not they have received third-party attention in reliable sources. Bearcat (talk) 15:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It appears satisfactory to me And it would be advantageous to retain this here. BPjohnathan (talk) 12:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: They deserve to be kept here for retention purposes. JammyKH (talk) 12:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magdalena Hinterdobler edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This soprano has not received significant coverage in independent sources, bar this one article.

Citations 2, 3, and 7 are from institutions with which Hinterdobler has been associated. The rest provide insignificant coverage, often not more than a half-sentence.

As there is only one source which is both independent and provides significant coverage, the relevant notability criteria (WP:BASIC/WP:MUSICBIO) are not met. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:35, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Music, Theatre, and Germany. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:35, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I spent about an hour trying to find WP:SIGCOV prior to this being taken to AFD. You can see my comments on the nominator's talk page as we discussed this before taking it to AFD. I looked at over two dozen critical reviews, and while there are many reviews of the operas she has been in, she is only mentioned in passing or not at all in those reviews. Likewise on reviews of her recordings. The most we get is a single sentence (two at most; and those are rare) with a general critique of her performance. For example, The Guardian review only mentions her name in the title list of leading singers but never actually talks about her contribution to the recording. This is not in-depth. The only in-depth independent source is the first source cited, Opern News magazine article. If a couple more sources of this latter kind are found that would prove WP:MUSICBIO and WP:SIGCOV are met. Please ping me if sources with in-depth independent coverage are located and I will gladly change my vote to keep.4meter4 (talk) 00:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:SINGER #6 "having performed two lead roles at major opera houses." -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there is that SNG, but I honestly think that we need to deprecate that in the same way that the RFC on WP:NSPORTS deprecated many of its similar SNG language. We really shouldn't be building articles on singers that can't meet WP:SIGCOV for verifiability reasons; particularly on BLPS per Wikipedia:BLPSOURCES.4meter4 (talk) 04:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion that that SNG should be deprecated does not mean that that SNG no longer applies. What is not verifiable about this article? BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never said that SNGs don't apply. SNGs by their nature often contradict other policies, which is why they are often contentious at AFD. It’s perfectly fine to make a claim to notability using an SNG. It’s also equally fine to criticize the SNG for being a bad policy because it doesn’t align with other policy language elsewhere. There have been many RFCs over SNG language, and several of them have led to policy changes that have→ deprecated certain SNGs within the the last five years. I think it’s reasonable to point to those RFCs as an example of how in certain content areas we have moved towards requiring more in-depth coverage. The need to re-examine our policies only gets established if people start raising that issue in discussions at AFDs. That’s what happened in the NSPORTS case prior to the NSPORTS RFC. Best.4meter4 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are allowed to criticize SNGs, but your opinions of the SNGs are not valid reasons to delete an article passing it; neither is the fact that other SNGs being deprecated sufficient reason for overriding this currently standing and completely valid SNG to delete this well-done article. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BeanieFan11 Not true. Per WP:SNG "Articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found, or if the topic is not suitable for an encyclopedia." Those calling for deletion are making a valid argument that this particular article lacks adequate sourcing. The main issue of contention here is whether a bunch of low level not in-depth coverage constitutes "adequate sourcing". Those of us voting delete are specifically making the argument that it does not constitute adequate sourcing, which is a valid reason to override an SNG per SNG policy.4meter4 (talk) 23:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May be, not required to be. The guideline was never intended to get rid of well-done articles like this. In what way is Wikipedia benefited by deleting here? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In my view, this is likely a case of WP:TOOSOON where the subject is likely to prove notability in the future, and we have simply jumped the gun and created an article before the independent sources have come into existence that contain in-depth coverage. I think it's best practice to wait to write articles on BLPs when we have a minimum of two in-depth sources for a variety of reasons; many of them articulated at WP:NOT, WP:VERIFIABILITY, WP:BLP, and WP:OR. One of the major issues in this article is that the majority of the biographical content is cited to PR materials written by talent management and PR firms for theaters, opera houses, etc. It's not best practice to build articles on BLPs from materials of this kind. We do the encyclopedia a disservice when we don't uphold quality standards that emphasize building biographical content within biography pages from independent materials. Not doing so, allows wikipedia to become a tool of promotion for talent management and PR firms, which ultimately creates a conflict of interest between wikipedia's goal of building an encyclopedia, and the potential to use wikipedia for other motives. One of our best means of quality control in terms of both verifiability and maintaining NPOV is making sure we build articles from independent sources with in-depth coverage. That's why we have WP:GNG. Best.4meter4 (talk) 00:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, only six of the 21 references in the article are from Hinterdobler's opera houses? What parts of the article are not verifiable or original research? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and they also are the most used sources, which verify over half of the article including almost all of the biographical information. The other sources only verify specific roles in specific opera performances. Asserting "only six" doesn't actually look at what information and how much of that information is coming from those non-independent marketing materials. If you can't see the ethical problem here for using marketing tools to verify a BLP article I don't know what to say further. We have two very different ideas about the ethics of editing and sourcing articles on BLPs.4meter4 (talk) 15:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I noticed that one of the two cited references for her Eva in Die Meistersänger, in Online Merker, includes 3 or 4 lines on her performance, both vocally and in characterisation, calling it "ein starkes Plus" (a definite plus). A search for other reviews in the same publication yielded other critiques of a similar length:
- "debutierte als Chrysothemis glanzvoll ... Das wird eine große Rolle für sie werden!" (made a glittering debut as Chrysothemis ... This is going to be a major role for her!)—we cite this role only from the Frankfurt Opera's summary professional bio
- noting her stagecraft as Susanna in Le Nozze but "vokal wirkt sie an diesem Abend strapaziert" (vocally, this evening she gave an impression of strain)—we don't mention this role
- a review of her Dorella in Das Liebesverbot in 2013 that she may want to forget, "quält sie sich ohne zuverlässigen Stimmsitz und ohne tragende Resonanz durch Wagners Noten" (tortures herself through Wagner's notes without reliable pitch or sustained resonance)—we don't mention this role either.

There are also briefer mentions that are not mere listings of who sang which role: "eine resolute, selbstbewusste Eva" (a resolute, self-confident Eva); "auch die 'kleinen' Walküren ... Magdalena Hinterdobler, die auch die Gutrune sang, ... sangen ansprechend" (the 'lesser' valkyries too, ... Magdalena Hinterdobler, who also sang Gutrune, ... were equal to their roles)—this compressed Ring is also not in the article. I suspect there are similar short reviews of her performances in other magazines and newspapers, and the article isn't reflecting that coverage because of a desire to focus on her leading roles, use English-language sources where possible, and / or avoid negative coverage. From the point of view of notability, however, I believe that mass of small stuff about her, together with at least one extended biographical article (I don't see the Frankfurter Allgemeine cited anywhere; has anyone searched there for coverage of her joining the company?), puts her over the top. Yngvadottir (talk) 02:55, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep we have enough for WP:BASIC. Artists are known for their work and this soprano also meets WP:SINGER. Lightburst (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lightburst can you please identify more than one source with "significant coverage" to meet WP:BASIC. The whole point of the nominator is that there is only one (not multiple sources) with significant independent coverage. Both Yngvadottir and myself have confirmed this is the case which is why I voted delete. Yngvadottir was able to locate several reviews mentioning the subject in one or two sentences but specifically stated they didn't contain significant coverage. Asserting that BASIC is met is just not true with the current sources in evidence. You are the only commenter here asserting BASIC is met, and you have provided no evidence to substantiate that argument. Basic states, "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published[4] secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[5] and independent of the subject.[6] Please produce a second source with significant coverage. 4meter4 (talk) 16:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The next section after BASIC reads People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. and A person who does not meet these additional criteria may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notability. You do not need coverage to prove notability, you can meet a subject specific guideline instead. Dream Focus 16:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You don't need to repeat yourself Dream Focus. I am aware of the SNG guideline. That still doesn't change the fact that BASIC isn't met which is why you yourself made an argument based on criteria 6 of WP:SINGER. That's fine if that is the WP:CONSENUS opinion. I personally am of the opinion that criteria 6 of SINGER is a poor predictor of notability, runs afoul of WP:BLPSOURCES policy, and is so subjective in its meaning and interpretation that it isn't a well crafted policy. After this AFD closes, regardless of the outcome, I am considering creating an RFC along the lines of Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability which deprecated similar SNG language for athletes. In my opinion BASIC should be our guide. We need at least two sources with in-depth independent coverage to build an article on any BLP in my opinion to meet the spirit of our policy guidelines at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons.4meter4 (talk) 16:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My rationale stands and we disagree so please observe WP:COAL and I will do the same. Lightburst (talk) 18:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer. Please consider the evidence and strength of the arguments in your close. I strongly urge you to ignore/overrule arguments made without supporting evidence.4meter4 (talk) 16:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subject specific guidelines exist for a reason. Someone can be notable for their accomplishments, not just for media coverage of them. WP:SINGER #6 Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03s64z1 distinguished Austrian pianist Rudolf Buchbinder, in London for a rare appearance at the Royal Festival Hall, and the rising star conductor Lionel Bringuier. Pianist Mark Swartzentruber will perform live on the show, ahead of his concert at Kings Place tomorrow. So she is in an ensemble that contains a distinguished pianists, a conductor called a "rising star" in an opera review, and a guy with his own concerts and notable accomplishments. http://markswartzentruber.com/biography/ She was on an album that got a long review. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/feb/14/bruch-die-loreley-review-andrew-clements She is a member of the Frankfurt ensemble, a notable ensemble which she has performed at major opera houses with. https://oper-frankfurt.de/en/ensemble/ensemble/?detail=1256 So a singer can be notable for having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. She performed as Elisabetta in Verdi's Don Carlos Dream Focus 16:14, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Just added another RS and performance. Gamaliel (talk) 19:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Although there is some LOW-level coverage, there is not enough SIGCOV. Performing with a notable ensemble doesn’t automatically provide notability in its own right to an individual. - SchroCat (talk) 22:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Oper Frankfurt: Coverage seems to be too trivial to have an article about the individual, but they do seem notable in context of the opera company. Oaktree b (talk) 00:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b I would disagree with that assessment. There are hundreds (perhaps thousands) of more significant singers with biographical entries in music encyclopedias that have been resident performers at Oper Frankfurt during its nearly 250 year long history. If we were to look through the Großes Sängerlexikon for example or The Grove Book of Opera Singers I would imagine we could compile a list of more than a thousand singers who were at one time or another employed by Oper Frankfurt as a resident artist; and all of those would be encyclopedic by virtue of being in an encyclopedia. If we are going to start covering indiviudal singers in an opera company article it should be the most prominent ones. Hinterdobler is a rather minor figure from an institutional point of view, and currently the article doesn't talk about any of its artists from a historical framework. It would be WP:UNDUEWEIGHT. A company like Oper Frankfurt at any given time employs close to a hundred leading singers in a season (Currently there are over 90 leading performers with the company between resident and guest artists) They have over 20 operas in their repertory for the 2024-2025 season between revivals of older production and their plans of more than a dozen new productions. Focusing on a single leading artist, particularly one with little coverage, seems inappropriate; particularly when many of their other artists would be high profile artists with lots of WP:SIGCOV. I note that many of the singers currently employed by them have articles, as well as lots of past performers. 4meter4 (talk) 01:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. She has received positive critical comment in at least two recognized sources. Further searching in the German press would no doubt reveal more.--Ipigott (talk) 12:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean Keep (not familiar with opera, hence not a "solid" keep). Appears to meet the music SNG (which itself should be sufficient, otherwise such criteria are useless) and the nom admits there is already significant coverage. Not to mention the article looks pretty decent – and NBASIC also states that If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I added a magazine review to the article. I think we have enough to show that the person is notable and I agree with BeanieFan11 regarding NBASIC. I came here from following the article at DYK. I was the editor who promoted the nomination DYK Bruxton (talk) 20:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am the first author, and I don't care if this article is deleted or not.
- I was pleasantly busy over the weekend, - sorry for being late to this, and thank you all who added to the article!! (That sort of collaboration is Wikipedia as I like it.)
- My first indicator of whether a singer is notable often is - as you will guess - my own first-hand personal opinion, for this one as for many others. I hope that everybody who has commented will have listened to her speaking and singing, Der Traumgörge. I saw her (only) in that opera, which was sort of a premiere because the conductor says it was the first unabridged rendering of Zemlinsky's music which had been due for performance (and rehearsed) in 1907, but was not given then for anti-semitic reasons, so had a late premiere in 1980. The only other of "my" singer articles suggested to be deleted was Johannes Hill (so I guess my opinion was right so far).
- I didn't know WP:SINGER but thank Michael Bednarek for pointing that out. It supports my thought that our view on notability should perhaps rely more on what a person factually does (primary), than what others think about what she does (secondary). - For comparison: just imagine we'd require a contemporary review for Bach's cantatas, we'd have an article about one of the around 200 extant. They remained mostly unpublished and unnoticed for a century after he died. - What she does - two leading roles at a leading house - is objective, what others write about it is subjective, and whether we regard what they write as in-depth or not adds another layer of subjectivity.
- In this particular case, I looked if sources supported my opinion that she is notable, and found enough to nominate for DYK, and obviously enough for the reviewer and for most of the readers that day. I simply had no time to look further for more facts and other sources, sorry about that but it happens with my focus on recent death articles and Bach's cantatas that turn 300 week after week (and real life, Bach cantatas in concert and the pleasant company that comes with it), so I again thank those who did that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- ps: I went to church yesterday to one that was also up for deletion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Responses:
  - @Yngvadottir, thank you for retrieving sources. You asked for the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: sorry, it was hidden under FAZ (Brachmann, Jan (27 February 2024). "Ein Lichtgedicht". FAZ (in German). Retrieved 5 March 2024.) Sorry, I thought FAZ is easier than all that German, and would say BBC, not British Broadcasting Corporation. The reviewer wrote about her singing in a half-sentence at the beginning "frisch, schön und so vorbildlich textverständlich" (fresh, beautiful and with such exemplary diction). I can add that to the article. As for the Mozart reviews, I never saw them, and Mozart seems to be past for her vocal development; her voice was possibly never ideally suited for singing Mozart. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC) - I added that review, and also the Chrysothemis review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - @4meter4, I added the Clements review of Die Loreley. I am not surprised that the reviewer of a first recording of an opera by a famous composer deals more with the opera than the singers. The review proves, however, that the recording was noticed internationally. - I have no idea why you'd mark what opera houses say about her - typically just a factual list of roles - as "promotional". The Chemnitz bio had a quote from a review. I added the complete review now. But why would you believe the same quote in the Chemnitz bio was promotional? Again, this review (Spinola) of a world premiere deals more with the piece than the singers. It describes her lead role at length. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gerda Arendt I already wrote this to you in another discussion. I will copy paste it here: "All work products/publications by a performing arts organization are intended as a tool of promotion as well as a tool for information. Opera companies/theatres are businesses and they have an invested interest in promoting their company/theatre and its performers in order to sell tickets. There is a commercial aspect to the performing arts, and the materials that an opera company/theatre produces for public consumption are directly connected to its commercial interests. This is why we should avoid using sources produced by theatres/opera companies as much as possible. Artist bios are written by paid talent management and PR companies. Most professional singers have a paid agent who specializes in marketing opera singers, and those agents often write the bios hosted on theatre/opera company websites. Or the opera company/theatre itself will have an in house PR/marketing staff member responsible for writing those materials. There is therefore, a direct COI with these kinds of sources because they are written as a marketing tool for commercial gain. When possible, its best not to use PR materials of this type for ethical reasons." If an artist is notable, we shouldn't need to use these materials because the independent significant coverage should be there to source the article.4meter4 (talk) 16:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I already responded in that other discussion and also copy paste here: "I don't know what you normally read, but I see that Oper Frankfurt and Hessisches Staatstheater write their own bios, and their own high-class program books. - German opera houses in general are public institutions, financed mostly by tax money."
    
    Adding: what in the following Frankfurt bio is promotional and not ethical to be used?
    
    "Magdalena Hinterdobler, who sang her first Evas in a new Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg at Oper Frankfurt last winter, joined the Ensemble in the 2023/24 season, during which she sang Grete in a new production of Zemlinsky’s Der Traumgörge / George the Dreamer and Elisabeth in Don Carlo, which is followed by Chrysothemis in the first revival of last season's new Elektra. Other highlights in 2022/23 included Agathe in Der Freischütz at Theater Chemnitz and Chrysothemis (role debut) in Elektra at Tirol’s Landestheater in Innsbruck. She trained at the University for Music and Theatre in Munich and Bavaria’s August Everding Theatre Academy with Andreas Schmidt, and in Helmut Deutsch’s Lieder classes. She was a member of the Ensemble at Oper Leipzig from 2014 - 2022, where her many roles included Rusalka, Micaëla in Carmen and Marie in The Bartered Bride. Word of her interpretation of Anna in the world premiere of Gerd Kühr’s Paradiese spread far and wide. While working in Leipzig with the Gewandhaus Orchester she also sang many Mozart and Italian roles, including Liù in Puccini’s Turandot and, most recently, Mimì in La Bohème. Her concert repertoire ranges from the baroque to contemporary music. She has appeared with many well known conductors and orchestras including Stuttgart’s Bach Collegium, the Munich Radio Orchestra, the Hamburg and Bamberg symphony orchestras, Dresden Philharmonic and the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchester. She also enjoys singing Lieder with the pianist Gerold Huber. A CD of early Wagner Lieder was released by CPO in 2013, the year she appeared with the Munich Radio Orchestra for the first time as Dorella in Wagner’s Das Liebesverbot / The Ban on Love, which was followed by roles in Wagner operas in Leipzig including Ortlinde and Gutrune in the Ring des Nibelungen under GMD Ulf Schirmer. She continues her journey into young dramatic roles this season with Agathe in Weber’s Der Freischütz at Theater Chemnitz and Chrysothemis in Elektra at the Landestheater in Tirol."
    
    Not all of this is even used, because I don't like lists of famous orchestras and conductors. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Gerda I'm not going to get in a back and forth. Wikipedia's policies on COI, non-independent sources are well articulated on multiple policy pages. WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT behaviour isn't helpful.4meter4 (talk) 16:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am just trying to understand. Simple question: that Ring in Leipzig - the review says she sang "a minor valkyrie" and "Gutrune". The Leipzig Opera has the full list of the cast, and is - to my knowledge - the only source for the fact that she was "Ortlinde". The source is used only for that detail but you tagged it as promotional. Should we therefore omit that detail, loosing precision? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Michael Bednarek, thank you for the reference for year and place of birth, dated 2008. I used it for more detail but it was marked promotional. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - 4meter4's objections, in this case, to material in a program booklet by a public broadcaster are in contradiction to WP:RS. If reliable sources collate an artist's performance data, Wikipedia editors are free, and indeed encouraged, to use that secondary source. That's a widely followed and uncontroversial principle. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Information published by one's employer (the theatres at which she has performed) is most certainly not independent coverage. The theatre's website or publicatons can be cited to show that she actually performed a role there, but they should not be cited for the theatre's opinion of her performance, as they have a conflict of interest in that they want to promote themselves by promoting their performers. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Correct, but no opinion or assessment was cited from those sites in this case. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:39, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm persuaded by the additional sources Yngvadottir located and analyzed as well as by the WP:NBASIC guidance that BeanieFan11 pointed out: multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. While there is the caveat that this coverage should not be trivial, I don't think it is in this case, based on the measure of trivial coverage provided in the notability guideline (the bare mention of Three Blind Mice), as the coverage identified through this review process examines and weighs the tropic's performance quality. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that measure is supposed to be an upper threshold for "trivial", as you imply, then the book-length coverage from the second example must be the lower threshold for "significant"... JoelleJay (talk) 00:49, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to imply the Three Blind Mice example is the upper threshold for trivial mentions (it's possible for coverage that is more than the Three Blind Mice example to still be trivial; a hypothetical In college, Binton Krill was in a band called Five Eye Lice. Five Eye Lice toured the West Coast in 1988.). I nevertheless think there's sufficient coverage that rises so above the Three Blind Mice example to the point that it's not trivial coverage. As for lower thresholds, I don't think there's consensus in the Wikipedia community for book-length coverage to be considered a lower threshold for significant coverage. With the exception of, say, multivolume biographies/histories, book-length coverage probably tends to be expected to be the upper threshold/expectation for significant coverage. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 06:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm just not convinced that a couple sentences of praise here and there in reviews really contributes to BASIC, let alone constitutes SIGCOV. Such brief descriptions of performances are absolutely routine in theater reviews and offer no evidence the subject has received sustained secondary coverage. We should not be constructing biographies out of 80% non-independent sources and 20% disjoint quotes on isolated performances -- how can we capture BALASP if separate pieces of information have not been independently contextualized with each other? JoelleJay (talk) 00:38, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Right now this looks like No consensus as editors are very divided about whether or not notability is established by the existing sources. I notice that a great deal of new content and new sourcs have been added since this article's nomination; a source review of this new content would be very helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yuno Miles edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

as much as i love yuno, the only reliable source that talks about him is this, which makes him not notable Authenyo (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i typed this crying knowing that big wikipedia will delete yuno miles Authenyo (talk) 00:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He is notable in my opinion; while I am not a fan of his music he does have almost 1 million followers on spotify and has been drawn even further into the public eye by his Drake diss. OJSimpsonLover (talk) 03:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that this page should be entirely erased. It has a good structure, some notability, and there's other pages that should probably be deleted. I vote no for this page deletion. Also why did that OJSimpsonLover fella get blocked??? It says for vandalism but he was just giving his opinion. TheEpicApartmentLord (talk) 16:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(insert reminder of WP:NOTAVOTE and to actually provide links or a reference to someone else's comment here instead of just saying "some notability")
OJSimpsonLover was blocked for vandalizing articles. That said, @Air on White, I'm not sure that means why their comment should be discarded. Only sockpuppets have a strike-comments policy. Or was there something I've missed? Aaron Liu (talk) 19:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the striking of the comment. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OJSimpsonLover was blocked for vandalism and his inappropriate username. However, he was not just a blatant vandal, but also a subtler troll: some of his comments appear to be in good faith and were aimed at confusing other users and administrators, making his block less likely. I also believe he was a sockpuppet for his demonstrated familiarity with the customs and policies of Wikipedia and his technical proficiency in areas such as wikitext and referencing. I therefore believe it was reasonable for me to assume that his comment was intended to disrupt the Wikipedia project and should have been struck through. Air on White (talk) 04:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They have not made any comments that I find questionable and do not seem to be familiar with Wikipedia at all. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This is a RS per Project Album [28], but that's all I can find for this person. No interviews or articles about him, was hoping something would show up. A lack of sourcing means !delete. Oaktree b (talk) 04:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have found a few sources - maybe look a little harder 2601:449:4100:DA80:E549:EA16:3F2E:1D57 (talk) 04:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So... could you link them here? Tollens (talk) 05:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did, they don't exist. Oaktree b (talk) 23:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails notability guidelines. Plus, there’s already a draft article for him at draft:Yuno Miles. (Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 00:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 04:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC) user indef-blocked for disruption on AFD —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 02:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)}}[reply]

Source	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/music/news-who-yuno-miles-fans-react-youtuber-releases-hilarious-drake-diss-response-metro-boomin-s-challenge	WP:RSP: user-generated		✘ No
https://www.rapreviews.com/2023/11/yuno-miles-yuno-i-cant-rap/			✔ Yes
https://www.sescoops.com/wwe/rapper-yuno-miles-releases-wwe-diss-track-im-beefing-with-the-wwe	Probably, website has multiple writers and this one has a degree		✔ Yes
https://pitchfork.com/features/article/the-age-of-shitpost-modernism/		One example with only one mention	✘ No
https://gizmodo.com/saga-bbl-drizzy-drake-kendrick-lamar-metro-boomin-1851470820		Only one mention as "The Meme Diss Track"; in the article's slides.	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Here's a table. I don't think two is enough, is it? Aaron Liu (talk) 11:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe most editors would consider two enough. Air on White (talk) 20:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SE Scoops is two videos and two quotes of his, with about 5 lines of text otherwise, might be a RS but that's hardly extensive coverage. Maybe 1/2 a source, being generous. I'd still like to see more than these two sources, neither of which is extensive. Oaktree b (talk) 23:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? The entire article is about a diss track he released.
I do agree that two sources is a bit far from keeping, though. Aaron Liu (talk) 00:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now that pythoncoder has provided a video reference with The Tonight Show, I think that tips the scales towards a weak keep. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - he appears in two articles that count towards GNG, but there isn't enough notable articles at the moment for a stronger keep. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 04:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - 𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘦𝘭'𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘮𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘺, 07:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, speedy per what? Aaron Liu (talk) 11:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AskeeaeWiki, is this even a vote? Per what? dxneo (talk) 13:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems like he passes GNG based on the sources so far. Other stuff that may or may not count, some from the draft version:
- [29] from Ones to Watch: Site with music industry backing (Live Nation Entertainment). Not sure about their editorial standards — couldn't find anything about it on RSN or RSP.
- [30] from TheNeedleDrop: may or may not count based on your reading of RSP
- [31]: got played on the nationally-televised The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 02:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From WP:THENEEDLEDROP:

... per Wikipedia policy regarding self-published sources, these reviews should never be used as third-party sources about living people.

Granted, what you linked isn't a review, it's an interview. But given the discussion is about what third-party sources could be used to justify keeping an article about Yuno Miles, I think this still fairly doesn't fit. It also doesn't help that Fantano isn't a journalist, let alone the fact that using YouTube links (of which this article currently uses two, both linking to Yuno Miles' own songs) is already considered generally unreliable per WP:RSPYT. Cadenrock1 (talk) 03:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think this discussion needs more time so I'm relisting it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete coverage seems weak, fails WP:NMUSIC.-KH-1 (talk) 02:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep, I personally think Miles is a notable but unreported figure, having a large following but lacking news coverage. This means has and will continue to have his page created many times before being locked. (Discuss Roastedbeanz1 contribs) 17:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Yuno Miles is very much notable. I know there's a stigma against making pages for every insignificant "soundcloud rapper", but rest assured, Yuno Miles is not one of them. ☞ Rim ^{< Talk | Edits >} 18:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edouard Masengo edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article seems to have very few if any reliable sources, and Google does not show anymore. IMO fails the WP:GNG. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Democratic Republic of the Congo. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:55, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Max Bartos edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only named role is a minor part in a musical which never reached broadway due to COVID. Only SigCov is a single piece interview in local news from 2019. Article created with COI.

No hard feelings to the author who will probably read this, I think they made a good faith to write an article with COI while following Wikipedia's policy, and the quality of the prose and formatting is nice. I hope they consider contributing to other, more notable topics that they do not have a conflict of interest with. BrigadierG (talk) 20:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Bands and musicians. BrigadierG (talk) 20:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Theatre, New York, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BrigadierG Appreciate the feedback on drafting. I have added in news sources as there is SigCov in multiple articles from NY Times, local newspaper, and national magazines. Also added context of Max as a producer and director, and more from times during COVID. His role as Darren was a principal role along with the roles of Brendan, Raphina, and Conor. Disclosed COI because it is the right thing to do, but do not believe this merits deletion since the materials are all sourced and accurately cited and quoted. Also added reference to his work with Tali Golergant as she featured on one of the songs on his album and she is now a ESC finalist. I also appreciate the suggestion to edit other articles and will definitely start to do that. I respectfully ask that the page mark for deletion be removed. Lawhawk 13 (talk) 02:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC)@Lawhawk 13[reply]

Delete. I had to reorganize this article to figure out what was going on here. This is a clear case of WP:TOOSOON. This young actor appeared in a supporting role in an off-Broadway show that was Broadway-bound but never got to Broadway because of the COVID-19 pandemic. He has not had any significant further theatrical roles. He has produced and directed a couple of amateur shows. He had previously had bit parts in several films in his teens, and a leading role in a YouTube short film, playing Young Shane Dawson, when he was 11. He has released two non-notable albums of folk music and played in bands. Does not pass NACTOR, and most of the refs in the article (certainly the ones in national press) are about the show, not the actor. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme Blevins edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. While there are a number of sources, I couldn't find anything that is both reliable and provides WP:SIGCOV. GMH Melbourne (talk) 04:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. GMH Melbourne (talk) 04:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Thanks for flagging. Have improved the article with additional authoritative news sources. We are talking here about one of the very best saxophone players of his generation. In the Brit Awards 2024 (the leading awards in UK for music), RAYE won more awards than any other artist, so for Blevins to have a track named after him on her album is notable. He has been regularly in the bands of several household name stars and played in a Grammy award winning album. Wikiwikiwwwest (talk) 00:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still try to include more sources that contribute to the WP:GNG criteria. GMH Melbourne (talk) 13:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per adequate refs by now JarrahTree 01:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which sources? I wasn't able to locate any. GMH Melbourne (talk) 04:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Coverage in the article is now about the Raye group, which isn't helping this person's individual notability... Listed here [32], but it's always in a long list of other people. Playing on an album with a group of others doesn't meet notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 13:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alley of the Dolls (band) edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Newly created article, PROD declined. Sourcing does not establish WP:GNG being met. WP:BEFORE brings up only a couple of brief reviews of their EP. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: England and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to add additional citations to the EP as many exist MusicForeverYours (talk) 01:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added citations to additional reviews, more are available but not always in English as the band has a lot of support in none English speaking countries so reviews are not in English as is requested by Wikipedia. MusicForeverYours (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Source 18 is a RS for the album review; the rest used now in the article is primary or non-RS. I can only find the Spill Magazine review, so without any other sources, the band is not at notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: If more citations for this article exist, they should absolutely be added. it's free realist 9 16:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aida Vee edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

lack of notability. little to no 3rd party articles detailing artist Minmarion (talk) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Music, Africa, and Uganda. Minmarion (talk) 02:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: Seems to have enough sources to satisfy the WP:GNG criteria. ([33][34][35]). GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adi Oasis edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article has been moved disruptively by the creator that has COI without improvements since last decline, so I am taking this to AfD. I cannot tell whether this passes notability, but as I can tell from the comments of the reviewers. Before search shows primarily stories on her releasing songs and albums, and sources listed are rather mostly interviews and videos. Toadette^Edit! 15:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Sources 2, 3 and 4 are listed as RS. Seems ok, some PROMO concerns but we can edit those out of the article. Oaktree b (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lya Stern edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is mainly a resume. Most of the sources in the article consist of dead links from websites that are related to Lya Stern; the rest of the sources either have brief mentions of her or don't mention her at all. After doing a Google search to see if there were sources that could be added to the article, the only significant coverage I found of her was from a website that listed Wikipedia as a source. The rest of the information I found was from her YouTube channel and mentions of her from her students. As a result, she doesn't met WP:GNG or WP:NBLP. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 20:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Romania, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, California, New York, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:08, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One source via Newspapers.com goes into some depth. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 03:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (Weak) - There is a big gap in WP on instrumental performers who have created the American musical/movie music scene, and in general the encyclopedia is too quick to delete (especially for women and minority performers), but here I think the AfD is correct. The Baltimore Sun article gives a bit of notability, but the other sources do not. A blurb on the back of one's teacher's independently published book is not enough. There needs to be more and I could not find anything that led to more than what a local performing teacher would have. Glad to be proven wrong. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 08:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there is a staff written bio at AllMusic here and an album review here to go with the detailed Baltimore Sun article linked earlier by Hameltion. Haven't done a full search yet, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What does Eudice Shapiro have to do with the subject of this article? That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 23:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just agreeing with That Tired Tarantula above -- @Atlantic306 you have linked to reviews for a different musician. If Lya Stern had an Allmusic staff bio, that would be relevant, but I could not find one. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, have struck my vote and comment. In my defence the erroneous AllMusic bio is the first reference in the article but I should have noticed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lovari (musician) edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to have any notable or significant credits. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 03:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 03:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 09:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References for Lovari on Wheel Of Fortune (2023): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV8rMTIQ2C0

https://bobbymgsk.wordpress.com/2023/02/01/wheel-of-fortune-1-31-23/

References for Lovari on Judge Jerry Springer (2022):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U78Iy9fFQkc

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt25965282/releaseinfo/

https://followmy.tv/episodes/2487792/judge-jerry/3x104/103

References for Lovari on Match Game (2019):

https://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/match-game-season-four-viewer-votes/

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5672484/characters/nm2102281

References for Lovari in The Barn 2 (2022):

https://dailydead.com/horror-highlights-8-found-dead-the-harbinger-the-barn-part-ii/

https://hellhorror.com/movies/the-barn-part-ii-movie-7804.html

https://podcasts.apple.com/es/podcast/trhs-random-chat-with-lovari/id1539578136?i=1000641962062

https://getoutmag.com/lovari-5/ 98.109.154.93 (talk) 04:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 16:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gumbi Ortiz edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:MUSICBIO. Essentially no coverage in reliable, independent sources online aside from an All About Jazz article. Meets no other notability criteria. Obviously created for undisclosed payments (see User_talk:WikiDMM). Clear friend a ^💬 21:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Florida, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Found this source from the TB times [36]. Also, All About Jazz profiles are typically self-published, as this one appears to be, so that doesn't count towards notability. Mach61 23:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per this Orlando Sentinel article. Mach61 23:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - this is truly a marginal case. There's at least some evidence of some coverage (per Mach61), but he has surprisingly few followers on social media such as Instagram. So I'm not !voting. Bearian (talk) 17:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:41, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as well as the Tampa Bay Times and Orlando Sentinel articles linked in this discussion there is also an album review here so that in total there is enough coverage to pass WP:GNG in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Right now, this is either a Relist or No consensus so I'm choosing another relist to see what other editors' opinions on it are.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:40, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep RS with in-depth coverage added. - Altenmann >talk 22:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep notable musician with a significant career, having worked with renowned artists and contributed to various music projects. However, the article needs more reliable sources and detailed information--Assirian cat (talk) 08:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quatuor Habanera edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find sources to show it meets WP:GNG / WP:MUSICBIO. Boleyn (talk) 19:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment found this album review here. Haven't done a full search yet, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary L. Coleman edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN. PROD was contested with sources from IMDB and of relatives being added, which do not establish notability. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, California, and Pennsylvania. GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dubee edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (music)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jb45424 (talk • contribs) 12:44, April 29, 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Sportspeople, American football, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Found this during PROD patrol, and wanted to discuss it at AFD myself. The pros here are a short Allmusic review and two sizeable writeups at Rapreviews.com. I have no prior experience with Rapreviews.com, but the site is used for more than 100 wp articles. I'm leaning keep. Geschichte (talk) 08:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find this article about the subject, and I would also describe myself as leaning keep. Hatman31 (talk) 17:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Rosenfeldt edit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hi; this is my first time both using Twinkle and participating in the AfD process, so try not to flame me too hard if I make a mistake here. This article has somewhat poor sourcing and I've done a check for his name to try and find anything on him but I've come up short. If anyone can find better sources for this, that would be great, but I'm unable to on my end. Neo Purgatorio (talk) 00:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and South Africa. Neo Purgatorio (talk) 00:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Denmark, Switzerland, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: nothing in the article suggests notability per WP:MUSICBIO and I'm unable to find any significant coverage online. InDimensional (talk) 11:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: High ranking in a major TV contest gives notability but I'd suggest that coverage in English will be hard to find Sansbarry (talk) 01:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - I found a couple of profile articles about him: in the Danish magazine Familie Journalen [37]; and on TV2 (Denmark) [38]. I don't think being a "semifinalist" on the TV Talent show is particularly impressive -- there are 35 semifinalists each year. But the two articles may be enough to pass WP:GNG. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 21:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These seem fine; it's probably the language barrier that makes finding sources harder. If someone's willing to add them in somehow (I can't at this exact moment) then I'd probably be willing to keep the article. Neo Purgatorio (talk) 15:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Nothing wrong with submitting an AfD and not being 100% sure (I have withdrawn a good few after somebody came up with dece sources). jp×g 🗯️ 01:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Nothing found meeting WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth. Source eval:

Comments	Source
Promo interview, fails WP:IS	1. Isbrand, Johan (8 November 2019). "Daniel creates magic in the Circus Building: I have taught myself everything". Familie Journalen.
Brief, but may meet WP:SIGCOV	2. ^ Jump up to:a b c Hansen, Sebastian Myrup (31 March 2018). "Was tapped on the shoulder - two years later he had been all over Denmark". TV 2 (Denmark).
Performance annoucement, fails WP:IS	3. ^ Daniel Rosenfeldt Performing at Skanderborg Festival 2014
Performance annoucement, fails WP:IS	4. ^ "Daniel Rosenfeldt Live at Louisiana". Archived from the original on 2015-05-09. Retrieved 2015-02-24.
Show promo trailer, fails WP:IS	5. ^ Det Stribede Show Trailer
Name mention, fails WP:SIGCOV	6. ^ Hansen, Sebastian Myrup (31 March 2018). "Dansedrenge gik videre til finalen i 'Danmark har talent'". TV2.
Database listing	7. ^ Discogs profile: Daniel Rosenfeldt

Nothing found in BEFORE that meets WP:SIRS. One ref above may meet SIGCOV, but that is not enough to show notability. BLPs require strong sourcing. // Timothy :: talk 12:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To remind you, sourcing level requirement for BLP is more stringent than GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Timothy's source review. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 14:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Schwein edit

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Relisting as previous nomination did not attract any comment and soft deletion was not applicable. Non-notable band that only lasted one year; no sources found in English or German. Sources in Japanese linked on the page do not show WP:SIGCOV. Broc (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Japan, Germany, and United Kingdom. Broc (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article should stay up. Per v, point 6, the group consists of several independently notable musicians. Weiqwbo (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per comment above, but also if only because having this content in each of the individual artist pages would be redundant (which is probably the point of Wikipedia:Notability (music) #6) -- t_kiehne (talk) 18:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question. Were they big in Japan? Bearian (talk) 20:09, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – KMFDM's parallel project, I believe it has enough notability. Svartner (talk) 09:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning keep per Svartner. BD2412 T 18:09, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Policy based input would be helpful
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 00:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete: While it is composed of notable bands, I am unable to find any significant coverage of this band or the albums. Almost all of the mentions I can find of it are just in interviews with Raymond Watts. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The entire article is an inference that notability is inherited (by participation in other bands). Nothing applied, presented, or found which meets direct detailing in reliable sources independent of the subject. BusterD (talk) 14:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Notability matters, we don't want to bloat the individual artists' pages.

The band operated mainly in Japan, or at least only performed live there so the problem with finding sources is that they would be in Japanese magazines of that time (more than twenty years ago). Which are one) hard to find nowadays, two) expensive to acquire when found, and, I suppose, three) wikipedia would knock them as sources since most of them would be featuring interviews with the band members and wikipedia considers this self-promotion (in my opinion that's not entirely relevant, if the publication is in a reputable magazine, it should count, since a reputable magazine wouldn't print about randos even if the randos paid. But what am I doing using logic here.)

Some scans of magazines can be found here:

https://tigerpal.dreamwidth.org/58976.html

https://tigerpal.dreamwidth.org/58387.html

https://tigerpal.dreamwidth.org/9790.html

Scans are probably the closest we can get to the magazines but we have to acknowledge that fans are more likely to want to preserve the musicians' own words over those of random reporters. Weiqwbo (talk) 20:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bands and musicians Templates for deletion edit

Categories edit

Proposed deletions edit

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

References edit

[1] Shaw, Punch (2008-05-24). "Guitarists' concert is well worth the wait". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. pp. A16. Retrieved 2024-05-17.

[:0-2] Siegel, Steve (2013-10-06). "Music is family affair for guitarist Eliot Fisk". The Morning Call. pp. [1], [2]. Retrieved 2024-05-17.

[3] Small, Mark (2021). "An Afro-Cuban Legacy". Acoustic Guitar ; San Anselmo. No. 331. pp. 30–33 – via Proquest.

[1]

[2]

[3]