Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Dixon (musician)

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. The consensus after 2 relistings appears to be that he isnot yet notable. DGG ( talk ) 21:09, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Dixon (musician)[edit]

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

I still confirm my removed PROD as there's still no convincing substance. SwisterTwister talk 17:42, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What did you find from your searches? --Michig (talk) 18:05, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have added content and references. Subject has won national awards, his singles have been given national radio airplay and he is notable per WP:MUSICBIO#1, 9, 10. The article itself does require wikification and reduction of POV tone but this is not sufficient reason for its deletion.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 02:13, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

shaidar cuebiyar Hi. Can you please point to evidence of him meeting 1, 9 or 10? I don't see the evidence that he meets #1 at all - the references broadly point to Yamaha, who are his sponsor, so hardly a reliable source, and the others aren't substantial or exactly prominent in any way. Also, I fail to see a major music competition he has placed in the top three of for point #9. If you're referring to the awards, then yes, the ASA songwriting one sounds important until you look into it and release it's hardly a major level award in any sense at the senior level, let alone the youth level. I don't see even an argument for point #10 because unless I am missing something there isn't even a claim that he's performed music for a notable television show, film or similar. I actually feel that this article is a COI case of WP:BOMBARD, where every little thing this clearly very active young person has done has been referenced to try to create a sum far larger than its parts. Sorry to challenge your views like this, but I can't see where your rationale is coming from on any of these counts. @Athomeinkobe: and @David Gerard: You may both be interested in revisiting this debate to look further into this. KaisaL (talk) 21:26, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MUSICBIO#1: see current article, refs [7], [8]. Additionally see A and B.

#9: I see both nationally recognised awards in ASA song writer and in My Song. Both wins are referenced.

#10: His song "Gold" was chosen as the theme for the Australian Teenage Expo in 2014. This is in the article and referenced by [4].shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, well, I have to say that I disagree on these claims. The awards might have impressive sounding names, but looking into them, they really don't seem to be that important at all. And the Australian Teenage Expo doesn't even have a Wikipedia article, and if that was an important event in Australia it surely would on the English Wikipedia by now. It actually seems to just be a vehicle for broadly unknown young musicians and the like, hardly a national event. It's all thin and I still feel this has just been heavily padded by a COI and doesn't come close to meeting the criteria. KaisaL (talk) 03:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaning towards keep per shaidar cuebiyar. Some of the awards are questionable, but overall there appears to be enough to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO. The article is in desperate need of a pruning, but it is not so bad that it needs to be blown up altogether. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 05:33, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete I can't see the case to include this at all. The article is packed with clichéd promotional copy and there surely has to be a conflict of interest somewhere for this article to have been produced in this way. Cutting through all of that, he just appears above all else to be somebody that was entered for a lot of dubious and often non-notable awards, winning at a young age. Winner of Mooroolbark's Got Talent and Highpoint Search for a Star and support act for an X Factor finalist don't come close to asserting any level of notability, and there's scarcely a single reliable source in the references. The only achievement that you could even argue is noteworthy is winning in the Australian Songwriter of the Year Award: Youth Category, but this alone cannot assert notability. His alleged national radio airplay isn't widespread enough to be considered rotation, either, because spot plays aren't really relevant. Overall, I see nothing worthy of a keep. KaisaL (talk) 03:55, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not disagreeing with what you say KaisaL, but how did you judge how widespread the airplay is? AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 07:16, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From the current contents of the article and the lack of evidence of Frank being prominently playlisted or put into rotation. In-store playlists don't count for that point, and touring radio stations to do interview spots isn't evidence of that either. If he'd been playlisted on a national radio network then not only would he qualify, but we wouldn't be having this debate, because realistically if that had happened there'd be tons more coverage in favour than a swathe of not-notable awards. KaisaL (talk) 21:19, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, rewrite - Shaidar notes he passes notability, but the article is so press-releasey that (per KaisaL) WP:TNT would be a fair verdict. Rewrite from the good refs up - David Gerard (talk) 11:49, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:47, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm with User:KaisaL on this one. The references are pretty unimpressive, the only one I might rate would be the one from the Dubbo Photo News, but that's basically just a local community newspaper. A bit of a search found a lot of astroturf but not a whole lot of independent coverage. I'm not seeing what part of WP:MUSIC he meets to be honest. Probably on the right track for stardom in a few years, but not there yet. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:26, 9 August 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:24, 14 August 2016 (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.