Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isaac Slade

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. JohnCD (talk) 16:26, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac Slade (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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. The references are generally about the band, not the subject. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep Comment. The article doesn't help its own cause very much, but an article like this [1] makes me think he may meet general notability guidelines. It will take more time to check things out. In the meantime, I've placed questions under the above two keeps. It will help point me in the right direction. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 18:33, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I haven't yet seen any reason why Isaac Slade meets WP:MUSICBIO. However, general notability is another question. The Denver Post article I referenced above [2] is a major article about Slade as an individual. Already cited in the Wikipedia article, this British news article [3] talks about Slade's personal life. Plus, there's this rather odd piece [4] from 2007 about potentially inheriting a $15 million mansion. There are also a bunch of interview-the-band-member articles, which by themselves aren't that big a deal, but contribute a little. Although it's a strange mix of unrelated stuff, I think that adds up to significant coverage of multiple events by non-local sources. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 18:54, 17 October 2014 (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.