Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angelle

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. Daniel (talk) 10:11, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Angelle

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

This is not a notable musician; she had one self-funded single which only charted in a low position for one week H6PAYH (talk) 03:12, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Rich British guy spends ₤2 million trying to buy his wannabe popstar girlfriend (Angelle) her first hit. Fails. Various British newspapers snicker. So what? WP:NOTNEWS. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 04:36, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:30, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:30, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Though I feel somewhat absurd for saying this, Angelle just about scrapes the guidelines for inclusion. WP:NMUSIC states that an artistmay be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria, and Angelle arguably meets #2 ("Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart" - her one and only single charted at a lofty number 43 on the UK Singles Chart [1]) and #11 ("Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network" - she was placed in constant rotation by Vibe TV [2]). Of course, the single only charted for one week, and the station didn't so much "place" her in rotation as they were paid handsomely by her rich boyfriend to do so, but ~~I don't think these things matter~~ - she just about meets NMUSIC #2 & #12. — sparklism ^hey! 10:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that you do not think that the subject is actually notable, but that you feel compelled to keep it because two of the NMUSIC criteria are technically met, if just barely and under unusual circumstances. But NMUSIC is very clear on this point: "...meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb". Having reviewed the article and the available sources, what is your own view? Is this a flash-in-the-pan news story, or a subject worthy of permanent inclusion in this encyclopedia? --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 14:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's a fair challenge. On reflection this has something of a whiff of WP:15M about it, and I have struck my WK !vote. Note that the charting single still meets NMUSIC, but I am now not convinced that there is enough to warrant an article in this instance. — sparklism ^hey! 16:17, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't agree. Although charts are listed down to position 100, the generally accepted threshold for charting is 40. This artist did not make the top 40. And the coverage on rotation on a major music television network is also not met because Vibe TV was not a music television network - it was a TV channel created purely as an advertisement for this artist by her boyfriend. The channel shut did not function as a music channel either before or after the 4 week slot that the artist's boyfriend bought. The channel did not rate high enough to record any viewership figures - it was just a vanity project by a rich person. — H6PAYH (talk • contribs) 04:31, 11 January 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.