Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abadawn (2nd nomination)

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abadawn (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)

Not seeing coverage sufficient to pass WP:MUSBIO. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:46, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:47, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Artist has no coverage in third party independent sources (or any at all). Sources in the article are self published or non-RS (and even there its just database entries or a passing mention). He fails WP:GNG, there is nothing on him out there. He generally has low reception, his tracks have only few views in streaming services. He is not aired in a notable station or something related. His albums are self-published. He fails WP:MUSBIO/WP:ENTERTAINER in all points. Article was deleted in the past, but has been recreated with a single purpose account. Should therefore be deleted again, as nothing has changed since the last AFD. Dead Mary (talk) 08:52, 23 September 2016 (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.