Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guy Protheroe

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Protheroe[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)

From my PROD which was just removed:

The only source on this page is an obituary of another person which doesn't even mention Protheroe, and the only sources I could find which did only had passing mentions. I'm surprised to find so little, especially for an article this extensive, but I do not see evidence of notability here.

The removal suggests sources in Google Scholar which may be of use here, but I could only find passing mentions in there as well so I'm doubtful. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:41, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:41, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are bios available, [1] and [2], and some coverage in the NY Times [3]. He appears to have a chapter in this 1975 book but I can't access the text: [4]. Judging by his AllMusic credits, link, Protheroe appears to have an extensive career. Given this I have a suspicion that Protheroe may prove notable - but further work, potentially with offline sources, is needed to find the evidence. If kept, the article really does need an ounce or two of WP:TNT. ResonantDis_tortion 20:29, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Internet Archive has British Music Now. Protheroe contributed a chapter (on Alexander Goehr) to the book; except for a short "contributor" bio (likely autobiographical) he's not profiled in it. Jfire (talk) 03:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Clearly a notable (GNG) individual who is featured in multiple publications. Google Books, Google Ngram and Google Scholar. For these reasons, the article should be kept. Aye, the article clearly requires a clean up and referencing, but that's not a reason to delete the article. IJA (talk) 22:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 11:37, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: though simply pointing to google books and google scholar results is insufficient to demonstrate notability, I think the Milken Archive bio and couple of paragraphs in the NYT pointed to by ResonantDistortion are just about sufficient on their own to demonstrate a GNG pass. (The English Chamber Choir bio isn't helpful, as it is not independent, and as Jfire says Protheroe is a contributor to, not a subject of, British Music Now). Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 14:52, 2 November 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.