Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brunette Models

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 keep. -- Cirt (talk) 03:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brunette Models[edit]

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

I've performed a wp:before search, and cannot myself find indicia of notability under wp standards, including sufficient RS coverage. Others are welcome to try. Epeefleche (talk) 05:34, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

==== Reply ====

What exactly is in the details of this problem? What does it mean "RS"?

Look, and when it comes to popularity in the same network only, this is a main problem, that Poland and Cyprus joined the EU in 2004. Very late for social web. Western countries already have long been out of the political Iron Curtain. For this there is a significant difference in the amount of information. If for example, in Poland there was something very popular, it is not necessarily visible on the network yet. This is particularly true of the 90's and earlier. Brunette Models isn't "an amateur with laptop only." It's a professional musician with many synthesizers. About BM is a lot of media publications. After problems with the portal Redwatch, began to protect your private image and not made public pictures etc. BM began in parallel with eg Biosphere (Geir Jenssen), but the first was behind the Iron Curtain, and the other had access to Western discourse. If we assume that the popularity measure only what is recorded in the network, it will confine ourselves to virtual reality.

For example, the memories for years I'm looking for a watch from the 80's, I had that, I wore it and I liked, but the Internet is no more. Nothing. Does this mean that only I dreamed about that?

What this article should be added that it was not removed?

Marylinex (talk) 14:33, 24 May 2011 (UTC)— username (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

==== ====

Please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:Notability.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for interest! @Epeefleche: Thank you for help! I tried to add references and other additions to the article and I hope soon to reach the standards of Wikipedia, and this article will avoid removal. Γραφή (talk) 21:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck. Note that it is perfectly acceptable to use non-English sources. I'm guessing that you may be able to help us there (They should, at the same time, be "reliable sources", as described above). Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What can I do more now? I think the article is finished now. If you think that not, please tell me. Γραφή (talk) 18:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. It sure is difficult to find references to back this article up that meet WP:RS. However, there are some hardcopy publications with articles that are listed as references/sources that are specialised publications in the field of electronic music and musical sculpture, there is a mention in Polish Newsweek, and there are minor mentions at commercial music websites. Nipsonanomhmata ^(Talk) 00:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The magazines seem good if they can be verified. A lot of the search results couldn't be salvaged, but this site [1] offering an album quoted three reviews, which are these [2] [3] [4] - frankie (talk) 03:18, 31 May 2011 (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.