Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bastian Emig

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to In Legend. As editors have noted, meeting one criteria for WP:BAND isn't a guarantee of notability. However, the suggestion that we should not maintain a redirect is definitely wrong ("redirects are cheap") and someone who searches for this person's name should find something useful. Given that I have to choose one or the other, there's a slight numerical preference for In Legend, and a stronger argument, so I've chosen that as the target. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:34, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bastian Emig

[edit]
Bastian Emig (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)

Non-notable musician. His name gets no hits on Google News, and no hits on Google Books. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Read WP:BAND bullet 6, which says "is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles". If we were to redirect this article to van Canto, how would we know he is a part of In Legend? If we were to redirect this article to In Legend , how would we know he is a part of van Canto? --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Just a man with two jobs, not a notable artist. The Banner talk 22:57, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - With all that being said, to which article should Bastian Emig be redirected? If an artist who is in ONE notable band should be redirected to that band, why should Bastian Emig be redirected to ZERO bands? --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:12, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What on earth makes you think that we have to have any redirect for a non-notable person? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:35, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - WP:BAND states "Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases". --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That does not mean we must have a redirect. It means that we should not have a standalone article. If he is more closely associated with one band, redirect there; otherwise toss a coin, or don't redirect. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:30, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - IMHO, "toss a coin" is not a good solution to determine to which band a musician redirects if both bands are equally notable. In this case, the musician's article acts as a "disambiguation page" of sorts. IMHO, it is better, when someone types in Hughell or Pitruzzella that it shows all of the bands that the person has been a part of, instead of just saying that the musician does not have any page at all, and requiring the reader to sift through search results. That is what an encyclopedia is all about. If it is properly sourced that the musician belongs to the notable bands in question, then the page should remain. If one or zero of the bands are notable, then the musician might not warrant a page. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:46, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply An encyclopedia is about summarising information on notable topics, from independent reliable sources. It is not about creating a walled garden of pseudo-articles on non-notable people merely because Jax prefers creating permastubs in order to up the blue-link count on his forest of navigational templates, rather than just cross-linking the articles. There is absolutrely no need to create pages on non-notable people, when all we need to do is add a few words to each article:
That's all. Simple, and no need for the pseudo-article. If you want, redirect Bastian Emig to either of these bands, and the reader will find the link to the other one. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Again, if both of the bands are equally notable, how in Sam's Hell will we decide to which article the musician should be redirected? --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:53, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply. Simple: redirect to which ever band he is most closely associated with, because that will be most helpful to the reader.
In this case, I find 6,000 ghits for "bastian emig" "van canto" and 19,000 ghits for "bastian emig" "in legend" ... so unless somebody has some contrary data, we should redirect to In Legend. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:05, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Article is now more substantive, and has more reputable references. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:13, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. This is a tricky one. Most of the sources here are not reliable, so the only information we should really have is that he is a member of the two bands - endorsements are hardly worth mentioning. Personally I don't have a problem with a stub that merely states that and links to the two bands. This is a plausible search term for either band. --Michig (talk) 08:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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) 14:26, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • But if he was only a member of one notable band we would at least leave a redirect to the band. Leaving nothing at all because he's a member of two notable bands doesn't seem to make much sense. --Michig (talk) 15:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep or Merge into In Legend. His name is a plausible search term for either band, no reason not to keep as effective disambiguation. A redirect should clearly be to In Legend - which is defined by his leadership. – SJ + 02:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep and comment: While the article is unlikely to grow beyond a stub in the near future, it does satisfies at least one criteria of WP:NMUSIC, although loosely. Also, take a look at the introduction of In Legend: "In Legend was founded in 2010 and is the piano band of Van Canto drummer Bastian Emig." I guess that gives us the answer to the "to which article should we redirect it" matter, right? Furthermore, he became part of van Canto in 2007, whereas In Legend was founded in 2010. He has released three full length albums with the first, and only one with the second. If I was to redirect it, I would choose van Canto. It is definitely his main band, in terms of the amount of work done. Victão Lopes I hear you... 02:54, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply - The article is now beyond a stub, and this is exactly the problem we run into with members of two independently notable bands. To which ensemble do we redirect? This is exactly why I have no problem with having such a "disambiguation" stub article stating to which bands the musicians is/was a part of. --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:05, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, redirect it to In Legend, then. Victão Lopes I hear you... 13:45, 25 March 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bastian_Emig&oldid=1083430221"