Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendy Starland

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) CTJF83 chat 23:10, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wendy Starland[edit]

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

Lucky 6.9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

American singer, songwriter, music producer and musician. Helped to discover Lady Gaga, but that article doesn't even mention her. The majority of the sources on her are about her dealings with Lady Gaga. Claims of notability under NMUSIC not sourced. Article is currently a mess and should be stubbed (if not deleted). Christopher Connor (talk) 23:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep regardless of the fact I wrote this early on; it is somewhat of a mess at present and not all of the facts are updated. I don't wish to sling accusations, but I believe this to be a mistake at best. It had been protected because of vandalism after the Lady Gaga info had been added, the nominator requested unprotection, proceeded to tag it with notability claims and now this. The Lady Gaga claim is legitimate and verifiable in the New York Times, MTV had a recent interview with Wendy as part of a Lady Gaga special and even without that claim, she remains a major artist on a major label who has charted hits. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find sources for the claims under NMUSIC? I fear that if the article is kept it's mainly going to talk about Lady Gaga and the lawsuit. Christopher Connor (talk) 00:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think she is notable. She especially is if she helped discover Lady GaGa. And the sources say she did discover her, so that should help the WP:V and WP:N. I'm Flightx52 and I approve this message 23:57, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Clean Up - something odd is surely going on here with this nomination and the history of vandalism and protection on the article. It does need to be cleaned up and better references are in order, and it appears that some editors have been trying to make a good faith effort. The true issue here is not necessarily notability, but instead reliable sources and verifiability. A lot of unverifiable material in this article could be removed but there should still be enough left for an informative stub. --DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 16:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing odd is going on (at least not from my part), so I don't know why you say that. It was protected apparently because the subject, who apparently wrote most of it, requested it, which was granted against the protection policy. It astounds me that an adminstrator would full-protect an article (1) a subject had written because they requested it (2) for three whole months (3) when the article had serious violations of NOR, V, BLP, NPOV, and was an autobiography full of promotional junk. I saw the article was in abysmal shape, asked for unprotection, tagged it up, and nominated it for deletion when no-one wanted to source the claims. Notability was weak from the start, and most of it comes from Lady Gaga, so there's going to be an unbalanced news article if we do keep. Even now, from the article it's not clear that notability is met, just unsourced (or poorly sourced) assertions. Christopher Connor (talk) 17:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and take a Valium The Lady Gaga doesn't cut it for me… I discovered Gaga too, I think, but if assertions are to be believed, she's been nominated for a couple of Best Emerging somethings, which much be sourced and verified. --UnicornTapestry (talk) 12:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Since I'm primarily responsible for this article in the first place, I'll take the reins and clean it up when I have some time to sit down and do it properly. I don't always lock articles down like I did this one, but it had been getting pretty badly savaged after the Lady Gaga news was added. My bad. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:12, 30 November 2010 (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.