Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K-391

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. Lourdes 05:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

K-391

K-391 (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)

Lacking notability due to the non-existent independent and verifiable sources that discuss the subject in-depth. The subject has two charting singles on national charts and one on a component chart, passing the musical notability criteria deficiently because these singles are merely collaborations with his friend Alan Walker, who is an established musician himself with numerous other charting singles, presenting a WP:Notability is not inherited situation. Passing the criteria at WP:NM implies the subject may be notable, but not necessarily is, in the presumption that a search for reliable sources may be successful. The sources currently present in the article are mostly primary[1], unreliable (blogs, etc)[2][3][4][5], insignificant[6][7], not about the subject himself[8][9] and passing mention[10], therefore failing the general notability criteria which requires the presence of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. KoopaLoopa (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I must also note that the creator of this article has been blocked for undisclosed paid editing and advertising. This article could be the subject of undisclosed paid editing, which is improper by the policies that govern this website. KoopaLoopa (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. KoopaLoopa (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. KoopaLoopa (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The article and it's sources are fine. Even though the two charting songs are collaborations with Walker, they are also K-391's songs and it doesn't matter if he had a lot or a little amount of input on any of those songs, they are his regardless. Most of the sources are usable and are fine as well, as long as they prove that they have actual editorial oversight or staff, which they do (EDM Sauce, Your EDM, We Rave You, etc). Pretty much the biggest issue with the article is that the subject pretty much just rides off of Alan Walker, who is present in most of the sources as mots sources are about the collaboration "Ignite" or about K-391's presence in guess-who's album. I wouldn't be surprised if this article gets deleted because of the heavy reliance on Walker, but for now, the article passes criteria 2 of WP:MUSIC and has enough sources about K-391, so it's fine with me. Micro (Talk) 22:43, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • MicroPowerpoint "I wouldn't be surprised if this article gets deleted because of the heavy reliance on Walker", yes, then why keep? And if you think there is "enough sources about K-391", please provide them here to facilitate greater discussion regarding the subject's notability. KoopaLoopa (talk) 10:38, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article is fine. Sources are in the article, no need to bring them here. The articles fate pretty much relies on the opinion of other editors — if they believe that the article relies on Alan too much or if the article is fine. Micro (Talk) 11:01, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ah okay, you're WP:NOTGETTINGIT. As I said above, the sources in the article do not discuss the subject in-depth and the music criteria requirement is dependent on the assumption that the subject is expected to have received significant coverage because the subject has had few charting singles. In this case they have not received significant coverage, therefore passing the musical criteria alone does not guarantee inclusion in the encyclopedia per the guideline - "meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept". KoopaLoopa (talk) 11:42, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:20, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Why isn't anyone else participating in this discussion? If it is closed based on the above editor's opinion, this article will be kept which is not appropriate because this musician does not deserve a Wikipedia page since he is not notable in his own right! Am I allowed to invite other editors here? KoopaLoopa (talk) 17:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @KoopaLoopa: See WP:AFD#After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 18:10, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The link is helpful, thank you. KoopaLoopa (talk) 14:41, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• DELETE - I don't see any notability here. From what I saw through a google search, the results were mostly lists or about his collaborators. And at least some of the citations concern me. For example, [6] is titled 'K-391 and Alan Walker…' but that is a falsified title and K-391 is not mentioned either in the title or the article. Many of the other references are trivial or are really about Alan Walker. ogenstein (talk) 06:41, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The article is fine. I added a mention of K-391's solo album in the Discography section. Even though he is much more famous by collaborations with Alan Walker, K-391 is a notable musician himself. The "career" section does need improvement, as it is focused more on Walker than K-391, but this doesn't mean K-391 is not notable enough to have his own article. With a few improvements, this article could become a very good one. WikiSmartLife (talk) 12:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • WikiSmartLife How is K-391 notable as a musician? Were you told by anyone to come here and vote like on Twitter? KoopaLoopa (talk) 13:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • KoopaLoopa, I was not told by anyone to come here. My thoughts are just that improvements can make this article more independent, with less reliance on Walker. WikiSmartLife (talk) 02:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: K-391 is notable in part due to collaborations — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:191:200:D357:7D81:792F:91BB:2BFD (talk) 00:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC) — 2601:191:200:D357:7D81:792F:91BB:2BFD (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • 2601:191:200:D357:7D81:792F:91BB:2BFD, K-391 has made some famous collaborations with Alan Walker, like you said, but this is not the reason his article should not be deleted. The reason is that he is a musician that has a solo album and many songs that are not collaborations, and he is notable for this. See WP:Notability is not inherited. WikiSmartLife (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I think there is something fishy going on. I believe K-391 or someone associated with him has brought these people here. KoopaLoopa (talk) 19:09, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • KoopaLoopa I already said, nobody influenced me to come here. I just saw the discussion and thought I should add my opinion. WikiSmartLife (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • WikiSmartLife you are simply stating the musician is notable but you have not demonstrated how. Collaborating with a notable musician does not make himself notable. Have you even read the linked guidelines? KoopaLoopa (talk) 13:20, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The sources are numerous but not strong, and mostly report that he exists, without establishing that he is notable. As an aside, the creation of the article and the voting pattern on this AFD look fairly suspect to me, but that doesn't affect the notability of the subject. Hugsyrup (talk) 08:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Having a number one single, with or without another artist, makes him notable. The coverage may not be extensive, but there's one source in the Norwegian version of the article that looks like decent coverage. --Michig (talk) 07:11, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to draft. Even some of the "keep" !votes above note that the article requires improvement, and suggest that sources not in the article could be found or added. Maybe this would suffice to keep it, maybe not. Send it to draft space, and those who think it can be improved enough to merit inclusion can carry out those improvements and submit it for approval. bd2412 T 02:08, 16 June 2019 (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.