| Revision as of 07:44, 14 March 2013 editJake Wartenberg (talk | contribs)Administrators22,979 edits →Mick Luter: delete← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:16, 14 March 2013 edit undoSandstein (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators188,272 edits Closing debate, result was no consensusNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' | |||
| <!--Template:Afd top | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result was '''no consensus'''. All seem to agree that this is a borderline case, but not on which side of the border it is... <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 17:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|M}} | |||
| :{{la|Mick Luter}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>) | :{{la|Mick Luter}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>) | ||
| Line 10: | Line 16: | ||
| <hr style="width:55%;" /> | <hr style="width:55%;" /> | ||
| :<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /> | :<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /> | ||
| :<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <font face="Century Gothic">](])</font> 11:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --> |
:<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <font face="Century Gothic">](])</font> 11:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --> | ||
| <hr style="width:55%;" /> | <hr style="width:55%;" /> | ||
| <hr style="width:55%;" /> | <hr style="width:55%;" /> | ||
| Line 20: | Line 26: | ||
| * '''Weak keep''' – The coverage in the ''Chicago Tribune'' and in the ''Sun-Times'' is enough to squeak by our notability guidelines, in my view: ] criterion #1. <font face="Comic sans MS">]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">]</font><font color="Green">]</font></sup></small> 05:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC) | * '''Weak keep''' – The coverage in the ''Chicago Tribune'' and in the ''Sun-Times'' is enough to squeak by our notability guidelines, in my view: ] criterion #1. <font face="Comic sans MS">]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">]</font><font color="Green">]</font></sup></small> 05:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' per Swister. Most, if not all of the coverage of the subject seems trivial. ⇌ ] ] 07:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' per Swister. Most, if not all of the coverage of the subject seems trivial. ⇌ ] ] 07:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> | |||
Revision as of 17:16, 14 March 2013
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was no consensus. All seem to agree that this is a borderline case, but not on which side of the border it is... Sandstein 17:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Mick Luter
- Mick Luter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I am unable to find sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that this person meets the notability requirements of WP:NMUSIC. There appears to be but a single news article on this person. The bulk of the article, which seems more like an essay or memoir, does not actually put much focus on this person's actual music career. The multiple issues template that has matters going back to 2008 provides further indication that this is not an encyclopedic topic. Agent 86 (talk) 09:36, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Weak Keep this along with two Chicago Sun-Times articles that are behind a paywall from the Google News search link above suggest that he may pass WP:GNG.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 11:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 02:55, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. I found what appear to be additional sources here and here. Seems to just barely scrape by notability guidelines, and if the guy is a relatively new artist then that notability has the possibility of increasing in the future. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
- Leaning towards delete - The two links MezzoMezzo found hardly mention him and that seems to be case with the results I'm finding, fakeshoredrive.com has pages of short blog entries which mention him in passing mostly for working with several other people and appearing on compilations. Despite searching Google News multiple times including his album, singles and mixtapes, I haven't found anything substantial. I also found another short blog entry here which mentions his 2008 mixtape and some of its singles and this (another brief mention). Google News archives found some results here (Chicago event listing), here (Portuguese blog), the two Chicago Sun-Times articles mentioned above here and here (this last one describes him as "up and coming", yet this was 2007 and there hasn't been that much substantial attention since), here (one of his collaborations, brief mention) and here (brief mention). He has received attention for working with several people including notable ones but it seems there hasn't been any substantial coverage solely about him which is required. This would have satisfied me if it wasn't more than an image and headline comparing him to Kanye West and this also compares him to Kanye West. I have found two links (doubledoor.net and ReverbNation) which say he won the "2007 Sony Music Nation" Award but I haven't found any appropriate and useful links (not even a Sony-associated link). Considering these short blogs and the attention from his hometown of Chicago, he's a little bit short of the bar for me but he may have potential for more significant attention in the future. Therefore, I have no prejudice towards userfying or a future article. SwisterTwister talk 04:50, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
- Weak keep – The coverage in the Chicago Tribune and in the Sun-Times is enough to squeak by our notability guidelines, in my view: WP:MUSICBIO criterion #1. Paul Erik 05:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per Swister. Most, if not all of the coverage of the subject seems trivial. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 07:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.