Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Trem

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 only person arguing for keep has not convinced anyone else. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Trem[edit]

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

Joseph Trem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:MUSICBIO, much less GNG. Has a few songs with claims of airplay. Not much on the way of independent sourcing (mostly twitter and youtube). Article moved out of draft by a new user, perhaps a WP:MEAT based on talk page communication. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Google search does not provide any RSes to support notability. Article appears to be entirely self-promotional. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:22, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article includes references to Social Media and YouTube because those are the official profiles of the artist, and where a lot of info lies. Article includes significant info about artist. Includes "Broken" mini-viral success. Definitely should be kept in Wikipedia. 69.121.195.96 (talk) 11:11, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why not give suggestions of improvement instead of deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.195.96 (talk) 11:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Our suggestions would be to remove all links to social media and to streaming and download websites like iTunes, since anybody can write about themselves and upload their music online, and include sources like newspapers and magazines where established and independent journalists are writing about Mr. Trem. If you can't do that because nobody else is talking about him, then it's a good indication that the artist is not notable outside his own social media, and should be deleted. Richard3120 (talk) 12:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article cannot in anyway hurt Wikipedia. Seems like a worthwhile and notable article about the artist, and even more sources will become available once artist releases new music, so deletion doesn't seem necessary to me. Social media sources can be useful if they come directly from the artist's profiles, validating the information as accurate. OhNana24 (talk) 15:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC) strike vote from checkuser blocked account.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:06, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"it doesn't hurt Wikipedia to keep this article" is not a valid argument. You have to show that the subject passes notability according to Wikipedia guidelines, not your personal opinion. Richard3120 (talk) 13:14, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a non-notable singer. We dont keep articles on the theory that more sources will come to exist in the future, or the subject will do more productions, we base articles on the person currently being notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the article's current state, it is notable. Sources are reliable, such as to "radio airplay pros", a trusted music promotion company, and the document referencing Trem's participation in vocal ensembles. It's not all social media sources, and when it is, it is to get official info on the artist. Artist has an official website, which is a good sign of legitimacy.

I very much care about Wikipedia and would not be fighting for this article if I didn't genuinely believe it is worthwhile to Wikipedia. 1, the suggestions you have given me, such as finding independent sources besides Social media, I followed and added to the article. Proof of airplay in "radioairplaypros.com" source. Artist has several published singles, and is even officially registered as a songwriter under ASCAP, as shown here: https://www.ascap.com/repertory#ace/writer/892011350/TREMITIEDI JOSEPH ABALO. This article deserves to stay on Wikipedia.69.121.195.96 (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. Radio Airplay Pros is not a reliable source, it's a marketing company where you have to pay to get your song played on the radio. And being listed in the ASCAP database just means "I've written a song" – that doesn't make either the writer or the song notable. Richard3120 (talk) 13:14, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The other editors who voted delete had reasoning which meshed with my reasoning. This article doesn't match with Wikipedia's music notability guidelines and as such needs to be deleted. THEFlint Shrubwood (talk) 22:09, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia:Composers, a writer may be considered notable if he or she has credit in either lyrics of musical composition. Trem has several, which is why he is stated to be a songwriter as well as being an artist. 69.121.195.96 (talk) 22:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It says no such thing on the WP:COMPOSERS page. Richard3120 (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. I cited the wrong site. It actually says it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria for composers and lyricists

OK, but you're still wrong... it says "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition". None of Mr. Trem's compositions are notable. Richard3120 (talk) 23:18, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OhNana24 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 5 April 2019 (UTC) strike inappropriate instructions from CU-blocked account.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:06, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. Jmertel23 (talk) 19:49, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's just too soon. I couldn't find any coverage about this young musician in independent reliable sources, and he doesn't satisfy any of the criteria at WP:MUSICBIO Zingarese talk · contribs 17:05, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The keep votes seem to argue rewarding this subject with a wiki page based on mere existence per social media, numbers of views on self-download sites, databases, etc., but there is no evidence of independent, third party RS recognition. ShelbyMarion (talk) 12:47, 10 April 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Joseph_Trem&oldid=891948694"