Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Baysted

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 no consensus‎. clpo13_(talk) 19:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Baysted[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)

Subjects fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Just another run-of-the-mill video game employee lacking in notability and failing to assert notability. As for reliable sources, he only has one outside this article, but that does not assert notability as well. Article has been created by the subject, a clear-cut COI case. Despite being PROD deleted in 2009, this article has since been recreated in 2011; despite this, issues still remains unaddressed since 2020.

This subject's bio is unsourced, nothing is except credits for his work consisting of those from official websites and IMDB, which is neither a reliable source. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Video games, and United Kingdom. SpacedFarmer (talk) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:MUSICBIO applies. In this short biography it states that Baysted has been nominated for a number of awards - at least some of which are notable including the Golden Reels. There is potential for meeting WP:MUSICBIO#8. ResonantDis_tortion 12:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, it's best to 'clean' out that article and start again by a 3rd party editor from scratch rather than it be left as some WP:COI vanity edit. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Articles for Deletion is not cleanup. Article is now stubbed. ResonantDis_tortion 16:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep multiple nominations for notable awards (WP:MUSICBIO#8); segment on national radio (WP:MUSICBIO#12); multiple secondary coverage in specialist zines (WP:MUSICBIO#1); music created for multiple notable works (WP:MUSICBIO#10). Article has been updated to demonstrate all this, and has been cleared up of non-RS. ResonantDis_tortion 11:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The current sourcing is not good. The Sound Architect and M Magazine are mostly interviews (primary sources). The "Contributors" source is of course primary, as is the University of Chichester page. I am therefore instating the {{primarysources}} tag. Behind the Audio leans towards acceptable whereas BBC Radio 3 seems to confirm WP:MUSICBIO#12. Geschichte (talk) 11:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:45, 28 December 2023 (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.