Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spaceman Patterson

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 no consensus. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 02:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spaceman Patterson (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)

advertisingBlatant selfpromo. One big list of "I have worked with ..." but almost nothing about the guy himself. The Banner talk 16:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. So I have changed the nomination from advertising to blatant selfpromo. The Banner talk 19:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Even if the subject were determined to be notable (and Michig makes a good point), the current article is such a mess that one would really need to erase the text and start over. Per WP:TNT, I'd delete it for that alone. If anyone wants to try to find sources proving notability, it would be best to start from scratch. --Larry (talk) 22:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete.   Admittedly he has worked with a number of notable artists but none of the sources provide in-depth coverage - the mentions are fleeting at best. This is an article (if one could call it that) about a musician who has apparently neither made a chart listed solo release, nor made a concert tour, nor received any awards, nor independently made a significant impact on the music scene. A plethora of such sources does not notability make. Fails WP:MUSICBIO, and the article is, as per nominator, a blatant self promo per WP:COI and WP:AUTOBIO. Not averse to stubbing to the first sentence if, and only if, some substantial sources about the subject can be found, but I can't see regular Wikipedia editors spending time salvaging it, so otherwise, yes: WP:TNT. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep i found some better sources and cleaned up the article, but he has so many casual references it is hard to tell MrsSunDoesntShine (talk) 22:37, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I never heard of him before I came across this nomination, but I found enough sources (now in the article), I believe, to meet WP:MUSICBIO: #1, #4, #6, and #7. I am One of Many (talk) 00:29, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 05:52, 3 August 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.
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spaceman Patterson, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.