Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Isley

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. — Aitias // discussion 15:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Isley[edit]

Michael Isley is not noteworthy from an encyclopedic perspective. I cannot believe this super-lengthy article about somebody who is yet to be considered famous has managed to stay on Wikipedia for this long. I personally know Michael Isley, and in no way have his musical endeavors been as successful as this article implies. I've read articles about my favorite bands with far less text. Moreover, it's difficult to come across this article unless specifically searched for, so unchecked vandalism will no doubt ensue... especially when more Drexel students get word of it. The primary writer of the article appears to be a certain StevieJBrenstur. Well, that account contains no information about anybody and I feel this implies that it was created specifically for this article to be written. The most likely scenario is Mike wrote it himself. The quotes have no citations and the only references are links to the band's website and venue affiliates.

Sorry Mikey but you're not famous yet. tbone (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:MUSIC in the basic criteria. Also fails WP:GNG; no significant, reliable, non-trivial coverage that is independent of the subject. ThePointblank (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vain vanity in vain. JuJube (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no reliable sources covering the subject. A interview on the campus radio station is not sufficient to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I attempted a search in Google News archives, and also in a library database of newspaper and magazine articles, to try to find sources that would help to establish WP:N notability. I found none. Delete unless sources are forthcoming before the end of this deletion discussion. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:48, 10 January 2009 (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.