Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiefer (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 keep. (non-admin closure) TheChronium 17:14, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kiefer (musician)[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)

Kiefer Musician who does not satisfy general notability and for whom the claim for musical notability is inadequate. Already draftified once, then moved back to article space by originator. The statement is made in the lede that the subject is a Grammy winner, but there is citation for that claim, and the statement at the end of the article about the Grammy is unreferenced, and has to do with a minor role. The article Ventura (Anderson .Paak album) about the Grammy-winning album does identify Kiefer as one of the producers of two tracks and one of the writers of one track. Musical notability criterion 8 refers to winning a major award such as a Grammy, and this is only a minor mention for an album, for a criterion that applies to performers. Only two references:

Reference	Comments	Independent and Reliable	Significant
1	Allmusic	No
2	Pitchfork (online magazine)	Yes	No, one paragraph

Robert McClenon (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Allmusic is long established as a reliable source for artist biographies, as can be seen from its inclusion at WP:RSMUSIC. Their review of his debut album is also good coverage. The Pitchfork source is a reasonably significant review, though admittedly short. The Happysad album actually has an entry at Metacritic [1] that gives four sources of reviews: Allmusic, musicOMH [2], and print reviews in Q and Mojo. I think this meets criteria #1 of WP:MUSICBIO. In addition, the artist has released two albums on Stones Throw Records, which meets MUSICBIO criteria point #5. Thanks — sparklism ^hey! 16:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as Kiefer passes criterion 5 of WP:MUSICBIO as Stones Throw Records is "an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable." Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:33, 26 May 2021 (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.