Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Norton

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. Black Kite 10:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Norton[edit]

Unreliable sources, seems like self-advertising Ziggy Sawdust (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. While he does yield a bunch of ghits, none of them are secondary, non-COI, reliable sources. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 23:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 15:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable published composer. Briefly rummaging through only the first page of "'Christopher Norton' composer" ghits, many do seem to be commercial sales sites, but I did go to Google news archives which do list this artist in multiple nontrivial outside sources [1], i.e Washington Post and Greensboro News, etc. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A notable published composer, just I think the article needs a bit of cleaning up, that's all. His books have made it over here in Australia and are well played due to being on the AMEB list. I think the number of internationally distributed books by him are enough to assert notability. Hoogiman (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 08:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 01:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cricket02 - The man is a successful composer and music educator--this info about him enriches WP. I added a passing cite or two.--Wageless (talk) 13:34, 15 February 2008 (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.