Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael James Arman Brough

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 JForget 00:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael James Arman Brough

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

Non-notable WP:UPANDCOMING lawyer/composer who might or might not become notable someday; in the meantime, a WP:CRYSTAL violation. Orange Mike | Talk 01:45, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. The article makes no claim of notability and has been flagged as unreferenced for over a year. I have been unable to find independent references to provide evidence of notability. --Deskford (talk) 07:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I have attempted to source this article several times and come up blank each time. Fails WP:V, let alone WP:!, WP:N or WP:MUSIC. Many people publish compositions and perform music in notable venues but none of that necessarily warrants a WP article, whether or not they are "up-and-coming" or established: we need the sources in all cases --Jubilee ♫clipman 11:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete—I don't object to the subject of the article, but I see neither any sources that demonstrate notability nor any indication that the subject's positions are inherently notable. I'm open to the inclusion of the article if the former can be shown. I was the admin who earlier deleted this article as an expired PROD, and Hintersatz indicated on my talk page that there are "reviews" out there that might, conceivably, provide some justification for the article. If such reviews are added, and they are not trivial, then I don't think that I can support deletion. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 16:49, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I might change my mind if these reviews were referenced. --Deskford (talk) 17:03, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with both of you: we might have yet another WP:HEYMANN here (I seem to have been involved in a number HEY-style AfD debates recently) --Jubilee ♫clipman 20:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I originally prodded this as it has been tagged as unsourced for ages without improvement and I could not find coverage myself. No problems at all with changing my vote if there is significant coverage available. Quantpole (talk) 11:08, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I can't find any sources. —ems 2 4 20:07, 10 May 2010 (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.