Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chrystalief

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 delete. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:32, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chrystalief

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Notability tagged for 10 years. Fails WP:MUSIC, has released on an indie label which is not close to being one of the more important indie labels. Geschichte (talk) 18:55, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: no evidence of notability. Aside from SoundCloud/YouTube/Spotify and a Discogs entry, the only Google hit I could find was a poll to establish whether readers liked his new hairstyle. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 19:11, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability indeed - per Dom Kaos. Also, it was created by a user back in 2010 who hasn't edited anything else since then. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 09:05, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not even close to being a notable musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: non notable --Devokewater (talk) 13:48, 13 October 2020 (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.