Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clayton Scrivner

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:11, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clayton Scrivner[edit]

[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)

Scrivner does not seem to be notable enough to warrant a page on his own. His notoriety seems to arise entirely from his band and thus I would suggest that we merge the pages, delete Scrivner's, or delete the band's (as no other members have pages) and fold it into Scrivner's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeacockShah (talk • contribs) 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Utah. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:23, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No notability outside of his bands, which themselves are barely notable. He has received no media coverage except for a few mentions within articles about The Rodeo Boys, and even those are sparse. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - While researching for my vote on Scrivner (above), I looked into his band The Rodeo Boys as well. I have seriously considered nominating them for deletion too, but it might be a close call because they got some local feature articles: [1], [2]; and some local album reviews: [3], [4]. That's the only useful coverage I can find on them. Any thoughts? ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:57, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would say they are worth deleting as well, honestly not sure why either had a page in the first place or how they made it this far. PeacockShah (talk) 19:39, 19 June 2023 (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.