Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Hills

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Salvio ^giuliano 23:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Roger Hills

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Roger Hills (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

WP:BLP of a musician, not properly sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. People who are notable as members of bands, rather than as solo artists, are not automatically entitled to have standalone biographical articles as separate topics from their bands just because they exist -- the notability test requires reliable source coverage about the person as an individual, establishing that he actually has a personal notability claim independent of the band as a whole. But the only references cited here at all are one of his bands' own self-published website about itself and the chart history of that same band, with absolutely no WP:GNG-worthy sourcing about Roger Hills himself shown at all.
As he's a British musician whose peak notability would have been established in the 1970s, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with much better access to archived 50-year-old British media coverage than I've got can find enough genuinely notability-building coverage about Roger Hills as an individual to salvage it -- but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be sourced properly. Bearcat (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Bearcat (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

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.