Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vov Dylan

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. ansh 666 07:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vov Dylan[edit]

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

Self-promotion article (Creating author is the subject's real name). Almost all the refs are to his own website. No demonstrated notability as a classical violinist; no university scholarships, prizes at competitions, work with notable conductors/orchestras or proper reviews. Just a populist who has made the news for breaking some gimmick records for playing very fast, similar to TV talent shows for doing unusual things. Came up accidentally because it was claimed as a Newington College old boy, so some good came out of the spam of that college in identifying other spam. ADS54 talk 11:21, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! ^{Babymissfortune} 11:43, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! ^{Babymissfortune} 11:44, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! ^{Babymissfortune} 11:44, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not meet WP:GNG or the WP:MUSICBIO guidelines. The only reliable, independent sources are about a trivial world record attempt. All other major claims are either referenced to the musician's website or not cited at all. Kb.au (talk) 01:58, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at best WP:BLP1E for what is really only a curiosity. Otherwise WP:PROMO and WP:PRIMARY. Aoziwe (talk) 12:45, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - of all the sources in the article this is the only one that's really much of an indicator, and one isn't enough. Frickeg (talk) 11:54, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – it maybe gimmicky but subject is mentioned in reliable independent sources for his "trivial world record". He has at least two albums via Ambition Entertainment, one of which appeared on a national chart. Passes WP:MUSICBIO#1, 2 and 5. I've recently added content and refs to the article.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 12:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Adsfvdf54gbb: was creating author notified of this AfD? As a courtesy, it is encouraged, so I placed a 'plate there.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 12:59, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @Shaidar cuebiyar:, not sure how you can say it passes WP:MUSICBIO points 1 or 2. Even if you consider the handful of trivial stories about his violin world record "significant coverage", being the only thing he's notable for in the independent reliable sources means it still fails WP:BIO1E. The album that "charted" got to #20 on the ARIA Hitseekers chart, which is not Australia's national music chart, but rather a chart signalling the top albums or singles by artists who have not yet made the ARIA Top 50 chart. Possibly passes point 5 if you consider Ambition Entertainment as important enough and around long enough to meet the guideline, but it still feels like a grasp for notability. Of the music releases from the "roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable" that Ambition seems to have, most seem be low-key records that aren't particularly notable. While you could read this point in the MUSICBIO guideline in a way that lends notability to Vov Dylan, I think it's important to read it in line with WP:NOTINHERITED. Kb.au (talk) 18:53, 20 December 2017 (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.