Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melodic (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. postdlf (talk) 16:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Melodic (musician)[edit]

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

Article fails WP:GNG. Koala15 (talk) 04:05, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 July 6. Snotbot t • c » 04:42, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 10:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Keep. There are a lot of sources in the second ref, and the third source looks pretty independent to me, but I not going to say for sure to really keep this article to avoid a WP:LOTSOFSOURCES argument. I'm sure more to this article can be done, though. Editor Eat ma talk page up, scotty! 17:54, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Saying "maybe keep" isn't an excuse for not doing a review of the sources. The sourcing in the article is terrible. The first item claims to be AllHipHop.com but actually goes to a blog where I can only find some video from an L. Burner. The rest are not reliable sources except for possibly Delaware Black which has news but also appears to be a site for promoting black Delaware businesses. And the link is dead so we cannot evaluate it. My own search found this article which calls him an "upcoming indie artist". An article is not justified at this time. No prejudice to recreation when he changes from upcoming to arrived as supported with significant coverage in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 15:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:BAND, only has done co-writing on two not notable songs and I see zero significance of this artist. STATic message me! 04:08, 22 July 2013 (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.