Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AIX1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AIX1[edit]

AIX1 (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)

Apparently shameless self-promotion, no indication at all of notability. It's already been deleted once as A7, which surely applies to this version too but wouldn't definitively solve the problem. It duplicates Akhadir Recordings Amsterdam (which I've also nominated for deletion) so I redirected it to that page, but was reverted. Delete and salt, please. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The article fails to meet GNG. The sources are trivial and lack depth. It's already been deleted once as A7. Delete and salt. There is no indication that the subject matter of this article will become notable. desmay (talk) 15:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I cannot find any evidence that this meets the guidelines for inclusion set out at WP:NMUSIC or the WP:GNG. Might be worth a little salt, too. — sparklism hey! 08:51, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The sources in the article are not reliable so I did a search. I couldn't find a single example of a secondary, independent source actually discussing the artist or his work. Lonehexagon (talk) 20:50, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - In addition to what is stated above, Earwig's copyvio tool indicates it is close paraphrased from this source Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:32, 9 March 2018 (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.