Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Levenson (musician)

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 keep‎. (non-admin closure) Desertarun (talk) 16:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Levenson (musician)[edit]

Dan Levenson (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't establish that he meets WP:MUSICBIO / WP:GNG. Unref BLP. Boleyn (talk) 14:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch 16:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A book was written about him, and he has written a book books about banjo playing. I have started adding references, but I need to take a break now. StonyBrook babble 22:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:HEY; per WP:GNG—we have WP:SIGCOV from the independent and reliable St. Petersburg Times, from a trade journal and from the book written about him (and these refs barely scratch the surface of what is out there on this elderly prolific artist and educator—after taking another break I will look for more); and per WP:ARTIST #1 (cited by peers as an authority in his field) #2 (renowned for implementing popular field workshops for beginners all around the world) and #3 (large body of highly acclaimed instruction books). StonyBrook babble 12:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 15:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • KEEP I think being the subject of a third-party book should qualify as notable. True, McFarland are niche publishers, but it is nonetheless third-party coverage. ShelbyMarion (talk)
  • keep with new sources added by @StonyBrook this article should pass notability through WP:ARTIST#1. Agree the Stern and Brooks book should weigh heavily.
Oblivy (talk) 01:56, 25 April 2024 (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.