Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradley Walden

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 and redirect to Emarosa. Black Kite (talk) 02:08, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bradley Walden[edit]

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

Should be redirected to Emarosa. Subject fails to have enough notability on his own to warrant an article. reddogsix (talk) 10:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You could have just redirected it yourself. This is articles for deletion, not articles for redirecting. Anyway, I've redirected it again and I'll revert any undone edits. If the redirect does not fly, I will support a merge to his band's article. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There should be no reason to delete this article. The lead singer has enough notability to have his own article. There are characters that have full articles made for them, yet they are not needed. An example being Valentina Vostok Knuxfan 8:12 AM, 7 October 2015 (CDT)
Narutolovehinata5, Knuxfan has been contesting this (he also went to REFUND to contest it) and repeatedly reverting the redirect, which looks to be why RD6 brought it to AfD. It might be worthwhile to let this go through a full AfD because if it closes as a redirect we'll then have the ability to revert based on the AfD closure. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyogirl79, I'm sorry that I've repeatedly reverted the redirect, and that I went to REFUND, I don't fully understand this process, and don't really know when or how these things are taking place. I can't code or anything like that for shit. So, sorry about the misunderstanding, if it needs to be deleted because it's not an adequate page, then fine. But is there not a way that I can get the topic to have an article made after it? The reason why RD6 requested it for deletion(redirection) was because he said the topic failed to enough notability to warrant it's own article, and I disagree. If the case was with my errors, and it being an incomplete page(I wasn't done editing it, and learned to use the sandbox after the article was already set for deletion), then I'd be fine with that, as I could upload a complete and adequate page later on.(or could I not?) Knuxfan 9:55 AM, 7 October 2015 (CDT)

We can always move a copy to the draftspace at WP:AfC and let you work on it there. Basically what you need to do is show where Walden has received coverage for things outside of Emarosa. The easiest way to do this is by providing coverage for singles and albums he's released by himself, if applicable. The other way to do this is to show that his other band is notable enough for its own article, which can be more time consuming and difficult, especially since it's an indie band. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:02, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for explaining. I'm good with that. Do sales count as notability? Or likes/views on videos or music produced by them? Or analytics taken from a page of their's, like website traffic and such? Or maybe even social media followings, or is that reaching? Knuxfan 3:31 PM, 7 October 2015 (CDT) —Preceding undated comment added 20:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, stuff like that isn't considered to be something that would give notability on here. These are all things that can make it more likely that someone will gain coverage, but popularity (which is what this boils down to, essentially) isn't something that automatically makes something notable. (WP:ITSPOPULAR) Now having a large fandom can sometimes make someone qualify, but that fandom would have to be extensively reported on ala Trekkies. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:00, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 15:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 01:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 01:46, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Emarosa as there's simply nothing to suggest better and I say this instead of deleting because I hope this isn't going to simply be restarted again without thinking if it should first. SwisterTwister talk 05:33, 17 October 2015 (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.