Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean Dawson (2nd nomination)

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 this article, and accept the draft. I actually stumbled up on the draft as part of AfC patrol but wasn't able to accept it, which is how I found this discussion. This is slightly early, but consensus is clear that the improvements to the draft rendered the nomination moot. Please give me a moment to complete the swap as I also think it pertinent to merge the histories for attribution purposes. Star Mississippi 00:35, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Dawson

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Jean Dawson

Singer who does not satisfy musical notability or general notability. The article does not speak for itself, and only says that he exists, so notability depends on the references. Two of them are interviews, and the other two are about albums rather than about him.

Number	Reference	Remarks	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	complex.com	An interview	No	Yes	Yes	No
2	essence.com	An interview	No	Yes	Yes	No
3	earmilk.com	Announcement of album	Yes	Not about the subject	Yes	No
4	nme.com	Review of an album	Yes	Not about the subject; yes about the album	Yes	Yes

There is also a draft, Draft:Jean Dawson, which I have reviewed and declined. The draft contains more information than the article but does not establish notability. The subject likely is notable, but neither the article nor the draft establishes notability. There was a previous AFD that was closed on 27 August as Merge. The closer had a difficult task because the participants seemed to imply more coverage than is shown. The article now has a tag on it saying that it should be merged into the draft, but there is nothing to merge because the article has no information that is not in the draft, and neither the draft nor the article establishes notability. Either the article should be deleted and editors should be asked to improve and resubmit the draft, or the article can be expanded within seven days to be better than the current draft for a Heymann close. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Music, and California. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the Article; Approve the Draft: The draft seems to easily meet GNG, and my own WP:BEFORE search revealed tons of sources from indie music magazines and websites, some of which are already cited on the draft. Just delete the current page to make way for the already mainspace-ready draft. Why? I Ask (talk) 06:33, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article, approve the draft: Not the draft creator but I put a lot of editing work into it so of course I want it kept, but I'll also back up Why? I Ask's search. There's plenty of coverage of the artist, not all of which made it into the draft because I was still working on it when some random IP editor clicked the submit button for no apparent reason. I do think the coverage is available to bring that draft to notability, and either way the plan from the previous AfD was to clean that up to replace the mainspace article which was an unsourced, underwritten mess to begin with. The draft had way more information in it already which would be way more useful; unfortunately most of the specific claims in there I couldn't find sourcing for so I had to cut a bunch, but I think what's there is still good. And, again, there's more coverage to add which I'll start working in now. QuietHere (talk) 07:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just finished another significant expansion of the draft, would definitely be worth another look, please and thank you. QuietHere (talk) 08:26, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon went ahead and resubmitted after my previous expansion, hope that's okay. QuietHere (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article, but approve the draft: per Why? I Ask. DizzyTheMan (talk) 18:20, 1 October 2022 (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.