Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stwo (2nd nomination)

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.  Sandstein  07:12, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stwo[edit]

Stwo (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)

Continues to fail WP:MUSICBIO. DBrown SPS (talk) 02:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep On a quick search I could immediatly find articles by Fader and Pitchfork and other reliable sources on the producer. He is capable of meeting #1 on WP:MUSICBIO but article needs improvment to meet standards. Wapunguissa (talk) 18:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete To comment on the "Keep" argument above, Fader and Pitchfork are, in fact, first person sources (interview with subject talking about himself) so do not constitute third party coverage. Other searches turn up the usual SPAM type coverage of announcements and credits in various user submitted sites, small-time sites, and sources such as Fader and Pitchfork, which partially exist as platforms for artists and companies to solicit promotional editorial content. Is there any difference between this article and the one on the same subject that was deleted 10 months ago? ShelbyMarion (talk) 14:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. A fair amount of coverage found, e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], although he doesn't seem to have done very much so far. --Michig (talk) 08:15, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom.66.189.232.210 (talk) 10:31, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Reviews of this person's work by Pitchfork and Exclaim! demonstrate "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself", thereby meeting WP:MUSICBIO.  Gongshow   talk 01:34, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.