Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Hickox

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) ansh666 01:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Tom Hickox

Tom Hickox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

My searches have simply found nothing better at all and I would not consider merging to the father's article a viable option as any current information there can suffice, examining the listed sources including the best ones showed nothing else convincing at all. SwisterTwister talk 06:34, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

• Keep – The subject meets WP:BASIC and WP:MUSICBIO criteria #1 at this time. The first three articles listed below provide significant coverage, one is paywalled, and others are short articles, but are devoted entirely to the subject and his works. Regarding the short articles, of note is that WP:BASIC states in part "... multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." Some source examples devoted entirely to the subject and his works are listed below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

References

• musicOMH (published by musicOMH)
• Paste (published by Paste)
• musicOMH
• The Sunday Times (subscription required)
• The Telegraph (6 ¶ about the subject)
• Spindle Magazine (published by Spindle Magazine, short article)
• The Journal (around 5 ¶ about the subject)
• The Telegraph (3 substantial ¶)
• Clash (published by Clash, 4 ¶)
• Clash (4 ¶)

• Keep Has been the subject of enough coverage in independent third party notable publications to pass muster. ShelbyMarion (talk) 13:48, 15 June 2016 (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.