Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agustín Fernández (composer)

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. The article passes WP:GNG and WP:COMPOSER#6 as highlighted by the participants (non-admin closure) ~ Amkgp 💬 04:44, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agustín Fernández (composer)[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)

Semi-procedural nomination on behalf of the subject, only semi because having done GNews and other searches I find less than 100 reasonable hits, most of which are either questionable sources (specifically, those pertaining to his alleged crimes) or brief mentions (in the vein of "so-and-so was inspired by Fernandez"). In other words, fails WP:COMPOSER and WP:PROF. Primefac (talk) 01:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Primefac (talk) 01:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 03:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bolivia-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 03:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 03:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable composer, with substantial (but regrettably paywalled) coverage at Grove Music Online [1], and substantial free coverage at British Music Collection [2]. These are published by Oxford University Press and Sound and Music respectively, which are independent and reliable. GNG is met, and I think this also meets point 6 of WP:COMPOSER. I have not looked through his works, it is possible that points 1 or 2 are also met in this case. I am satisfied based on the sources in the article and a few others[3][4][5][6] that the subject has been convicted and is a fugitive. So, this isn't a matter of "alleged" crimes, there is a criminal conviction. That isn't a basis for notability on its own, but since the subject is otherwise notable, the conviction should be covered in the article. I don't usually assign much weight to whether the subject of an article wants or does not want a Wikipedia article, and I consider that to be even less relevant when the subject's motivation is to hide the fact that they are a sex offender and a fugitive. ST47 (talk) 19:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per WP:GNG. Per sources. Per coverage.BabbaQ (talk) 09:25, 7 August 2020 (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.