Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Banks (musician)

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. Daniel (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Banks (musician)[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)

This article concerns an Australian guitarist. BEFORE searches do not return significant coverage that would indicate that this person meets GNG or any more specific notability criteria such as NMUSIC. The article is also written in a fairly promotional tone which further supports the concerns about lack of notability. DocFreeman24 (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. DocFreeman24 (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. DocFreeman24 (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment After nominating, I discovered that there was a prior AFD regarding this article back in 2008, when notability guidelines for musicians were more liberal. It wasn't linked in the talk page but I just found it. I do not think it changes my conclusion re notability (as the guidelines in NMUSIC appear stricter today) but wanted to flag in the interests of transparency.DocFreeman24 (talk) 19:06, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we lack any demonstration of passing notability. Contrary to what was asseted back in 2009, just because you have performed publicly in more than one country does not mean you are a notable musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject is clearly a non-notable. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I couldn't find any suitable IRS via a Google search, and only 1 via a ProQuest database search of Australian and NZ newspapers, which I have added to the page to give it the best chance of survival. But I think it still clearly fails GNG. Cabrils (talk) 06:12, 10 February 2021 (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.