Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mick Boogie

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) treelo _radda 00:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mick Boogie

Contested prod. The artist is not notable and fails WP:MUSIC plus lacks non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publications. JBsupreme (talk) 02:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lack of nontrivial independent coverage in reliable sources is indicative of a lack of general notability. / Blaxthos ( t / c ) 03:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The research that went into preparing this AfD was woefully inadequate. I would not usually say it so sternly, but the relevant Google News search was even pointed out when the article was de-prodded. This is an influential DJ and mixtape producer, and it really only takes a glance at a Google News archive search to see that. I have added seven references to reliable sources, and there are plenty more. It passes WP:MUSIC criterion #1. Keep. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep he does show up in print and on-line.(Jayzee69 (talk) 22:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

But are those reliable sources? Corvus cornix_talk 04:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that all of the edits by Jayzee69 were to AfD discussions on one single day. Corvus cornix_talk 04:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep a search for news.google.com has many hits. Article does need sourced. We66er (talk) 05:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Since when do articles not need sourcing? Corvus cornix_talk 01:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - You misread. They meant "article does need [to be] sourced", I think. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 01:58, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - - Oh, thanks, sorry, I did misread. Corvus cornix_talk 20:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 00:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, doesn't seem to meet WP:NMG. Stifle (talk) 11:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you think is insufficient about the current sources listed? There are more that could be added but I thought this was an adequate sampling for WP:NMG criterion #1. He was mentioned in Rolling Stone for having one of the "Top 5 Mix CDs" of 2006. There are articles about him around the time he became the DJ for Cleveland Cavaliers games. There are many mentions of him for his collaborations (I've added just a small sample of those). This is not trivial coverage, in my view. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 12:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Weak keep as improved. Stifle (talk) 21:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets GNG. Some of the sources are in passing, but the plain dealer one is all about him and his work, and the Miami Herald one has two paragraphs praising his work. I stopped looking there, but they seem to meet WP:N acceptably. Hobit (talk) 13:14, 26 September 2008 (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.