Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Barnard
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 Speedy Keep. Closing early as nominator seeks an outcome other than deletion. I suggest a merge discussion be opened. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:12, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shane Barnard[edit]
- Shane Barnard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While the duo appears to have some notability (even if our article on it is gravely under-referenced), Shane Barnard appears not to pass WP:NM. The article has been without references for more than three years, i.e., since before the ten-day limit for BLPs came in. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:50, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as I have improved this article and added a significant number of references from reliable third-party sources. Subject, while best known as half of Shane & Shane, is also covered as an individual in multiple sources ([1] and [2], for example). Subject meets at least criteria 1, 4, 5, and 12 ([3]) of WP:MUSBIO, any one of which would make him notable by Wikipedia standards. (Many of these sources could also be used to improve the Shane & Shane article, if one were so inclined.) - Dravecky (talk) 07:40, 13 August 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, Michaelzeng7 (alt) (talk) 01:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge as nom. There are now nine sources cited in the article, so someone has done some good work. One of them is about Shane Everett; seven of them are about Shane & Shane; one of them is about "Shane Barnard of Shane & Shane". As already stated above, the duo appears to have some notability but Shane Barnard does not. Which of the twelve criteria at WP:Musicbio does he (separate from and as opposed to the duo) fulfil? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply As noted above, I am the "someone" who improved the article and, also noted above, listed the specific criteria the subject meets. Also, when a news article identifies its subject as "Paul McCartney of Paul McCartney & Wings" or "William Shatner of Star Trek fame" that's for the convenience of readers, not an indication that the subject has no independent notability. - Dravecky (talk) 12:59, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply. Hmm, it seems I read your previous remarks with less than sufficient attention; sorry about that. The links you cite as [1] and [2] are the two references from the article that are not specifically about the duo; one is about Shane Everett; the other is about "Shane Barnard of Shane & Shane", as already mentioned above. Neither indicates any independent notability that I can see.
- Reply As noted above, I am the "someone" who improved the article and, also noted above, listed the specific criteria the subject meets. Also, when a news article identifies its subject as "Paul McCartney of Paul McCartney & Wings" or "William Shatner of Star Trek fame" that's for the convenience of readers, not an indication that the subject has no independent notability. - Dravecky (talk) 12:59, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- With regard to the twelve criteria: (1) has this note: "Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases". Where is that independent notability documented? Criterion (4): where is the non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country by Shane Bernard as an independent musician? Criterion (5): what is the evidence that he (as distinct from the duo) has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels, and which labels were they? The article isn't clear on this. Criterion (12): What is the evidence that Shane Bernard (as distinct from the duo) has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:46, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Shane and Shane: the article suggests no notability apart from the duo. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:51, 22 August 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.