Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Music

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Music. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Music|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Music. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Related deletion sorting


Music

Gee-Haw Stables

Gee-Haw Stables (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I found no significant coverage, and the two references are trivial mentions. SL93 (talk) 01:28, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can You Duet

Can You Duet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article appears to fail WP:GNG. A merge to a page of lists List of programs broadcast by CMT was suggested, but that is simply a page with a list of articles...it does not have details on any of the articles within its paramaters. Therefore, I do not feel it is an appropriate target for a MERGE. I did REDIRECT the page there, but that was reversed. I would only support a MERGE if there was an appropriate page to add any info to, but currently I can not identify any. Therefore, a deletion of the article is the only outcome, unless independent notability can be established. DonaldD23 talk to me 20:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Television, and United States of America. DonaldD23 talk to me 20:04, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The show ended in 2008, so whatever sources were listed in the last AfD are probably all you'll find. They're ok, not super-extensive, but enough to prove notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    or merge a relevant section in the network's article, I'm not fussed about it. I don't think it should be deleted, we seem to have enough sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 20:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 22:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: As per the above, this show aired 16 years ago, so granted the majority of sources are likely dead-linked or no longer exist on the web, but the show was definitely notable at the time of the page's creation and produced several country acts with varying success, had a panel and hosts who were reputable insiders in the industry, and was a program aired on a prominent TV station. It's also bizarre that there was considerable discussion surrounding keeping at least some of the information on this show and merging it onto another page, but instead of anyone doing that, someone hastily took matters into their own hands months later and just blanket-deleted the whole page. I also see a lot of content listed on the page that could (and should) easily have sources added to it that just... isn't there for whatever reason. CloversMallRat (talk) 06:36, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Here's a Common Sense Media review [1] and one discussion of a performer [2]. It's not a slam dunk, but Common Sense review is a RS. The rest help too; Common Sense, Variety and Billboard should be enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 12:24, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And here's one about the winner: [3]. We have enough for at least a basic article about the show and the winners. Oaktree b (talk) 12:29, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! The article doesn't need to be big and grandiose to remain on Wikipedia. There are enough sources to make it notable and relevant, but the show aired 16 years ago and the Internet doesn't just keep articles around forever. I remember when it aired, it was quite an ordeal at the time in the country music sphere. I'm sure it would've been sourced out the wazoo if we had the resources we have now with how much media content is all over now vs. back then. People were barely even using Facebook in 2008. But we can't go back in time. I do think the article needs cleaned up a bit, I will say that. There's definitely a way to make some of the content read better, i.e. CloversMallRat (talk) 18:21, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure how the discussion veered off onto a talk page, in a addition to the one here, but the last discussion had the sourced discussed by Ten Pound Hammer. Oaktree b (talk) 01:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanus Muller

Stephanus Muller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article falls far short of what is expected of a BLP. Had this been written only a few days ago, I would have immediately draftified it. As it is now a few years old, a discussion needs to happen in order to do that. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Music, and South Africa. UtherSRG (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Enough book reviews (now added to the article) for WP:AUTHOR. As for the shape the article is in: despite the plethora of scary cleanup banners, I've seen much worse (in BLPs in no danger of being deleted) and WP:DINC. And calling for draftification of a years-old article with years-old cleanup banners is just a dishonest way of calling for its full deletion after it sits unaddressed for another half-year. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The recent addition of book reviews strengthens the article's compliance with the notability guideline for authors. Deletion seems like a harsh solution. We should improve the article, not delete it. Waqar💬 17:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tully (app)

Tully (app) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The sourcing that exists is very weak. Several are interviews with the app's co-founder/promoter, Joyner Lucas, who is a notable musician, but notability is not inherited from him. Other sources appear to be either PR-based; press releases reposted onto other websites. A few passing mentions. No in-depth coverage in reliable sources, particularly if HNHH is not considered reliable. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Salem K. Meera

Salem K. Meera (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources, no claim of or sources for notability — Iadmctalk  20:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liu Shueh-shuan

Liu Shueh-shuan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real sources and fails notability test. A search turns up only social media — Iadmctalk  20:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:

    People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

    • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
    Sources
    1. Huang, Xiaojun 黃筱筠 (2013-02-24). "前綠委兒子劉學軒打造女子國樂團 開拓大陸" [Liu Xuexuan, son of the former Green Committee member, creates a women's Chinese orchestra to explore the mainland]. China Review News Agency [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13.

      The article notes: "劉學軒1969年生,2008年創立“無双樂團”,創立樂團之前是作曲家,創作種類多元,包括管弦樂、室內樂、打擊樂、現代國樂乃至於電影、電視、動畫配樂、兒童音樂及數位音樂。應邀擔任國家國樂團“2006精緻系列”四場音樂會製作人及音樂指導。也曾幫母親翁金珠製作選舉歌曲。"

      From Google Translate: "Liu Xuexuan was born in 1969. He founded the "Wushuang Orchestra" in 2008. Before founding the orchestra, he was a composer and created a variety of genres, including orchestral music, chamber music, percussion, modern Chinese music, and even film, TV, animation soundtracks, children's music and digital music. Invited to serve as the producer and music director of four concerts of the National Chinese Orchestra's "2006 Exquisite Series". He also helped his mother Weng Jinzhu compose election songs."

    2. Tang, Yawen 湯雅雯 (2009-02-23). "推手劉學軒 翁金珠的兒子" [Driving force Liu Xuexuan, son of Wong Chin-chu]. World Journal (in Chinese). p. A10.

      The article notes: "文化大學助理教授劉學軒擅長將傳統音樂創新,融合交響樂與電子音樂,打造跨界音樂型態。 ... 如果不說,很少人知道劉學軒就是立委翁金珠的兒子,他從事音樂創作十多年,管弦樂、大型民族音樂、電子樂都擅長,甚至擔任樂團、劇場音樂企畫,頗受好評。"

      From Google Translate: "Liu Xuexuan, an assistant professor at the Chinese Culture University, is good at innovating traditional music, integrating symphony and electronic music, and creating cross-border music styles. ... If not mentioned, few people know that Liu Xuexuan is the son of legislator Wong Chin-chu. He has been engaged in music creation for more than ten years. He is good at orchestral music, large-scale ethnic music, and electronic music. He even serves as a music planner for orchestras and theaters, and is well received."

    3. Zhang, Qiongyue 張瓊月 (2011-09-15). "無雙樂團 13日驚艷匹茲堡" [Peerless Band Stuns Pittsburgh on the 13th]. World Journal (in Chinese). p. C9.

      The article notes: "文建會金獎作曲大師劉學軒目前任職文化大學。2008年12月成立無雙樂團,從旗下十名團員開始,刻增至42名團員。由前台灣國家國樂團樂團首席王明華擔任無雙樂團藝術總監。"

      From Google Translate: "Liu Xuexuan, a master composer who won the Gold Award from the Council for Cultural Affairs, currently works at the Cultural University. Wushuang Band was established in December 2008. It started with ten members and quickly increased to 42 members. Wang Minghua, former concertmaster of the Taiwan National Chinese Orchestra, serves as the artistic director of the Wushuang Orchestra."

      The article notes: "劉學軒親自設計團員身穿的現代版旗袍與12公分的高跟鞋表演,更將她們所受的美儀訓練全新呈現給觀眾。... 劉學軒成功地重新包裝國樂,結合交響、流行與電子樂風,顛覆一般人對古典音樂的刻板印象,使無雙樂團所到之處大受歡迎。"

      From Google Translate: "Liu Xuexuan personally designed the modern version of cheongsam and 12cm high heels worn by the members for the performance, and also presented their beauty training to the audience in a new way. ...Liu Xuexuan has successfully repackaged traditional Chinese music, combining symphonic, pop and electronic music styles, subverting the stereotypes of classical music that ordinary people have, making the Wushuang Orchestra very popular wherever it goes."

    4. Huang, Junming 黃俊銘 (2004-10-23). "瓦薩里 劉學軒 因石獅結緣" [Vasari and Liu Xuexuan became acquainted with stone lions]. United Daily News (in Chinese). p. C6.

      The article notes: "瓦薩里二度訪台,除帶來波希米亞風的德弗乍克,重頭戲是演出劉學軒「三峽祖師廟的石獅」,這是他向畫家李梅樹致敬之作,紀念李主導重修祖師廟。曾修打擊樂的劉學軒加了舞獅、北管樂,曲子譜完,昨天得到瓦薩里的熱情相擁。"

      From Google Translate: "Vasari visited Taiwan for the second time. In addition to bringing the bohemian Dvorchak, the highlight was Liu Xuexuan's "Stone Lions of the Three Gorges Ancestral Temple". This was his tribute to the painter Li Meishu and commemorated the reconstruction of the Ancestral Temple led by Li. Liu Xuexuan, who once studied percussion, added lion dance and northern wind instruments. After composing the music, he received a warm embrace from Vasari yesterday."

    5. Wu, Yuzhen 吳玉貞 (2004-10-20). "布達佩斯交響樂團 來台演出台灣作家作品 劉學軒創作獲肯定 母親翁金珠欣慰" [Budapest Symphony Orchestra comes to Taiwan to perform works by Taiwanese writers. Liu Xuexuan's creation was recognised and his mother Wong Chin-chu was delighted.]. Min Sheng Bao (in Chinese). p. CR2.

      The article notes: "現年卅五歲的劉學軒南門國中音樂班畢業後考上國立藝專音樂科,再到美國加州大學長堤分校專攻作曲,學成後回國一直致力音樂創作,劉學軒說,三峽祖師廟的石獅是他回國後在家當了七年超級奶爸的作品,在家創作也帶孩子,要把作曲當職業真的很辛苦,還好撐過來了,"

      From Google Translate: "Liu Xuexuan, now 35 years old, graduated from the music class of Nanmen Junior High School and was admitted to the music department of the National Art College. He then went to the University of California at Changdi to specialize in composition. After completing his studies, he returned to China and devoted himself to music creation. Liu Xuexuan said that the stone lions at the Three Gorges Ancestral Temple This is the work of him who worked as a super dad at home for seven years after returning to China. He was composing and taking care of his children at home. It was really hard to turn composition into a career, but luckily he managed to survive."

    6. Hei, Zhongliang (2004-09-17). "三峽祖師廟的石獅獲瓦薩里選為巡演曲目 劉學軒 曲融台灣情 布達佩斯樂團為新曲目添中國鑼鼓" [The Stone Lions of the Three Gorges Patriarch Temple were selected by Vasari as a tour piece. Liu Xuexuan. Qu Rong Taiwan. Love Budapest Orchestra adds Chinese gongs and drums to new repertoire]. Min Sheng Bao (in Chinese). p. A12.

      The article notes: "今年35歲,出生於彰化的劉學軒,有一位著名的「縣長媽媽」翁金珠,但更有一位「影響自己更深」的父親劉峰松(現任台灣文獻館館長),從父親在文化界勇於任事的過程中,學習到尊重本身文化的重要性,使得擅吹中國笛的他,"

      From Google Translate: "Liu Xuexuan, 35 years old, was born in Changhua. He has a famous "county magistrate mother" Weng Jinzhu, but he also has a father Liu Fengsong (currently the director of the Taiwan Archives) who "affects him more deeply". In the process of working, he learned the importance of respecting his own culture, which made him, who is good at playing the Chinese flute, ..."

      The article notes: "劉學軒表示,媽媽在聽到自己作品將由布達佩斯交響樂團演出的消息時,幾幾乎是以「跳起來」的興奮心情,來祝福兒子的幸運,畢竟昔日母親以鋼琴啟蒙了如今的他,而後進入南門國中音樂班、前國立藝專音樂科就讀,退伍後曾考進實驗國樂團,再赴美國加州州立大學長堤分校專攻作曲,1999年才學成返國。"

      From Google Translate: "Liu Xuexuan said that when his mother heard the news that his work would be performed by the Budapest Symphony Orchestra, she almost jumped up with excitement to wish her son good luck. After all, his mother had inspired him with the piano in the past, and then entered the South He studied in the music class of a junior high school and the music department of the former National Academy of Arts. After being discharged from the army, he was admitted to the Experimental Chinese Orchestra, and then went to the California State University at Long Beach to major in composition. He returned to Taiwan after completing his studies in 1999."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Liu Shueh-shuan (traditional Chinese: 劉學軒; simplified Chinese: 刘学轩; pinyin: Liú Xuéxuān to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 08:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanasis Kaproulias

Thanasis Kaproulias (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced BLP with no claim to notability — Iadmctalk  17:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

X (demoparty)

X (demoparty) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. The name of the event makes it more difficult to search. I was only able to find mentions, such as "One of the most traditional and largest events still running today is demoparty X, a specific event for the Commodore 64 platform with the first edition held in 1995 in the Netherlands (POLGáR, 2016)." (machine translated from Portuguese) in a paper about the demoscene in Brazil. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties.

Edit: X is also discussed in Freax: The Brief History of the Demoscene, Volume 1 (2005) by Tamás Polgár:

"The great meeting events of the Commodore 64 scene in the second half of the nineties were the great international demoparties: The Party in Denmark, Assembly in Finland, and mainly the German Mekka Symposium and Breakpoint. These parties, in addition to the great annual X parties organized by Success & The Ruling Company. For the first time, in 1995, this party was held in Utrecht, Netherlands but moved several times to different cities. Some still remember X’95 as the best X party, and later X parties as the best parties of C64 scene history. Interestingly enough the X still takes place every year. In 1997 the party united with Takeover, and became a multiplatform party under X-Takeover label but the cool oldschool atmosphere was broken by Amiga and PC users, so the cooperation split up. X is still the largest Commodore-only demoparty."

. toweli (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rojda Aykoç

Rojda Aykoç (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Her notability cannot be proven by independent and reliable sources. Only IFEX source is good, but it is not adequate for passing GNG. As a result of the research conducted on the person, it was not possible to find independent and reliable sources. Considering there are not enough resources, deletion is appropriate. Kadı Message 20:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rheji Burrell

Rheji Burrell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am not sure how this article looked back in 2012 when the first AfD came about, but now the article is confusing because it doesn't seem to know whether it wants to be about Mr. Burrell alone or about him and his brother. At any rate, the article discusses a non-notable production team(?) whose own discography hasn't seen them ever having charted; and the list of albums that they supposedly produced for other artists isn't sourced. It doesn't help that the article reads like the brothers themselves wrote it. Erpert blah, blah, blah... 04:53, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Programme level

Programme level (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ambiguous term, unsourced and I found it difficult to find good sources to add. Boleyn (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:52, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nine Lives (Def Leppard song)

Nine Lives (Def Leppard song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously redirected as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nine Lives (Def Leppard song). Recreated but with no indication of passing WP:NSONG or WP:GNG. A WP:BEFORE search fails to come up with anything to establish notability. John B123 (talk) 19:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and salt: article has been recreated and re-redirected numerous times since that first AfD, including once less than a month after the AfD. Clearly, Martiniturbide disagrees with that result as they've been the one restoring the article every time (and they have a statement here expressing as much), but everything that was said in 2009 still holds true, as does everything said in this nomination. Given their history, it seems safe to assume Martiniturbide wouldn't cease their activity even with a renewed consensus, so I supporting salting to prevent further disruption. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 21:58, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why Wikipedian think that the article is irrelevant while there are other artist that have their singles articles. It is just explained that it does not fit the "notability guidelines" and does not provide details. The deletion of this page is subjective to the wikipedian humor. I disagreed with you "Salting" and I can not find evidence of your statement that "everything that was said in 2009 still holds true". Martiniturbide (talk) 22:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't shown how it passes any of the criteria for WP:NSONG, nor do any of the sources in the article pass WP:RS. Richard3120 (talk) 19:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which specific criteria? For me it covers the criteria. The page you link says "..may be notable if it meets at least one of these criteria".
non-trivial: It is a non-trivial Def Leppard song since it is the first time the band records a duet in a studio record. Also Tim McGraw is a well recognized American country singer. Martiniturbide (talk) 12:26, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Treujenn-gaol

Treujenn-gaol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Likely fails wp:gng Heyallkatehere (talk) 10:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 13:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: I vote to keep this article. It has been improved with additional references and content. Waqar💬 17:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Foot in Mouth (EP)

Foot in Mouth (EP) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NALBUM and WP:GNG. Appears to have not charted or been covered by reliable sources - May be some Japanese coverage, but difficult to locate. Mdann52 (talk) 06:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Green Day discography#Extended plays: None of the coverage in the article is from reliable sources, and I found no reliable coverage. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:46, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The Japanese title is Bakuhatsu Live! +5 and charted at number 45 on the Oricon Albums Chart. I wasn't able to find much in the way of reviews, but I admittedly only made a surface-level check (爆発ライブ!+5, if anyone wants to search further for sources). IanTEB (talk) 20:38, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this info it helps me out. i will add this to the page Stnh1206 (talk) 00:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Someone has found a oricon article on this EP where it shows to have charted. number 8 on the reference page Stnh1206 (talk) 00:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:Except it's not an EP, it's the same length and a longer track listing than the bands debut album. If it's redirected it should be to live albums, but if it's charted it shouldn't be redirected, just retitled.Hoponpop69 (talk) 13:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is tune in Tokyo is 33 minutes and it says it is a live ep Stnh1206 (talk) 20:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Commentary in relation to WP:NALBUM number two and the new information that this EP charted in Japan?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 01:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Panta n' antamonoume

Panta n' antamonoume (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 11:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Ho King

New Ho King (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Highly unlikely to pass the WP:10YEARTEST (and WP:SUSTAINED). Content which isn't related to the song isn't substantial enough to merit a stand-alone article. – Hilst [talk] 15:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, took a spin through the hits, and before the feud there’s not enough coverage for an article, just lists, listicles, coverage of nearby crime, and one art collective that named itself after the restaurant, everyday restaurant coverage stuff, not anything that would give the restuarant lasting notability. Ruth Bader Yinzburg (Ruth Bader Yinzburg)
  • Merge with Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud or delete. There is no SIGCOV outside the feud and a shooting that occurred in proximity of the restaurant, therefore not enough to pass GNG independently. --hroest 17:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Sources published before the Kendrick Lamar song "Euphoria" was released on 30 April 2024:
      1. Shikatani, Gerry (1999-12-18). "Cuisine's familiar as an old friend". Toronto Star. Archived from the original on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13 – via Newspapers.com.

        The review notes: "We do that now at the New Ho King, owned by Howard Wong (and his nephew Albert Wong) who once worked in his father's Rose Garden Cafe in Moose Jaw, Sask., a city where, in fact, writer Fred Wah's grandfather also cooked. The New Ho King's menu covers cooking from various regions of China, but more than anything, customers know it's grounded in Cantonese cuisine as familiar as an old friend. We remember the original Ho King on Dundas St. at Larch St., a tiny block east of Spadina Ave. There we'd pick at periwinkles in black bean sauce at 3 a.m. But 10 years ago, it closed its doors. Then in 1996, there was news. It had resurfaced on Spadina Ave. under new owners, but with their friend, original chef/owner Tom Quan, at the wok."

        The review notes: "It is quite simple, not high-end dramatic. But servings are large, and few Cantonese kitchens are cooking with such accomplishment and light touch, while leaving an equally light trace on the wallet."

      2. Kaplan, Ben (2008-01-12). "New Ho King Restaurant" (pages 1 and 2). National Post. Archived from the original (pages 1 and 2) on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13 – via Newspapers.com.

        The review notes: "Our Chinese food restaurants should be open for delivery after the bars close, and this inexpensive Spadina Avenue Cantonese greasy spoon is as good as we've tasted any hour of the day. The pork chow mein ($6.95) is crunchy and the stir-fried noodle is wet, dripping with a tangy black bean sauce chock full of beef and bean sprouts Perhaps the General Tso chicken ($8.50) left something to be desired; a harder fried outer coating might have provided a sharper contrast with the white chicken meat, but this restaurant is a revelation—the only way to improve it would be to include a 3:05 a.m. helping of cold tea with its lightning-fast delivery."

      3. Chow, Jason (2008-02-02). "The Dawdling Dragon". National Post. Archived from the original on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13 – via Newspapers.com.

        The review notes: "1. New Ho King. 416 Spadina Ave. Everybody knows this late-night spot feeds the drunks till 5 a.m. (see our cold tea story on Page 13), but few know that you actually don't have to endure a room filled with club-land loudmouths to get your fix of chow mein. The better alternative: Go home and call for delivery. You can get your fried rice in the comfort of your living room as late as 3 a.m. on weekdays and even later on weekends."

      4. Quadri, Sarah (2003). "New Ho King". In Clark, Alexandra (ed.). Cheapeats Toronto: Toronto's Guide to Good Inexpensive Restaurants. Plethora Press: Toronto. p. 83. ISBN 0-9731201-1-8. Retrieved 2024-06-13 – via Internet Archive.

        The book notes: "Even on a Sunday night you could be lined up outside the door for this place. New Ho attracts all ages until the wee hours of the morning. There's an unbelievable selection of Chinese and Cantonese dishes, all served very fresh at reasonable prices. Don't forget to try the hot & sour soup ($5) - excellent and they don't skimp on the shrimp. Other favs include the General Tso chicken ($7.95) and the eggplant and shrimp with garlic sauce ($8.50). A worthwhile stop in downtown Chinatown."

      5. Davey, Steven (2011-06-20). "New New Ho King". Now. Archived from the original on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13.

        The article notes: "It might not be the most cutting-edge Cantonese kitchen on the Avenue but New Ho King is certainly one of the most popular as the lengthy lineups after last call will attest. To handle the crowds, NHK has moved into much larger and far swankier split-level digs three doors away. ... The food’s the same as it ever was, a little bit too salty and verging on over-cooked. Like that matters at 3 am?"

    2. Sources published after the Kendrick Lamar song "Euphoria" was released on 30 April 2024:
      1. Brown, T.M. (2024-05-06). "A Chinese Restaurant Is Winning the Kendrick Lamar-Drake Beef. New Ho King, open since 1976 in Toronto, has become an unlikely pop-culture battleground after being featured in songs from both rappers". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2024-05-27. Retrieved 2024-06-13.

        The article notes: "Caught in the middle of this culture-consuming rivalry is New Ho King, an unassuming restaurant in Toronto’s Chinatown. The restaurant, which has served dishes like hot-pot grouper and tofu, and sweet-and-sour pork with pineapple to Torontonians for nearly 50 years, was briefly name-checked in “Euphoria.”"

      2. Cecco, Leyland (2024-05-10). "'There's been one winner – this restaurant': Toronto eatery is victor in Kendrick-Drake beef. Hip-hop luminaries bash each other in a diss track war of war of words featuring an unlikely venue: the New Ho King restaurant". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13.

        The article notes: "New Ho King, which has operated in the city’s Chinatown for nearly five decades, is still grappling with the newfound fame. Until recently, its tables would be sparsely populated on weekday evenings, picking up pace on the weekends as late-night crowds wandered in. But on a Thursday evening, a line snaked out the door as diners clamoured for a table. Passersby stopped outside the pink glow of the restaurant’s neon sign and posed for photos. ... Neither Lamar nor Drake specify which rice dish diners should order from the 14 menu options: the most popular is the Ho King Special Fried Rice, a mix of shrimp, pork, eggs, peas and lettuce."

      3. Assaly, Richie (2024-05-02). "Drake vs Kendrick: Toronto Chinese restaurant New Ho King takes centre stage in escalating rap beef". Toronto Star. Archived from the original on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13.

        The article notes: "At 410 Spadina Ave., in the heart of Toronto’s historic Chinatown, New Ho King is a go-to spot for authentic Chinese food and late-night eats."

      4. Liu, Karon (2024-05-06). "We ate at Toronto's New Ho King, the spot Kendrick Lamar name-dropped. Here's what to order". Toronto Star. Archived from the original on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13.

        The article lists five dishes.

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow New Ho King (Chinese: 新豪京) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 09:48, 13 June 2024 (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.

XIX International Chopin Piano Competition

XIX International Chopin Piano Competition (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:TOOSOON article about a thing there's absolutely nothing of any significance to say yet. This is still about a year and a half away, so we obviously don't know who the prize winners or even the competitors are -- literally the only thing we can say about it at this point is basic competiton rules sourced to the competition's own self-published website about itself, which is not a notability-building source.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation next year if and when there's actually reliably sourceable stuff to say about it, but we don't already need a boilerplate placeholder article to exist now. Bearcat (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: I have now added numerous sources and expanded the article. The competition will begin on 23 April 2025, which is less than a year. The Chopin Competition is the most important musical event in Poland and one of the most significant events in classical music. Creating an article at this point, also considering that the rules have changed considerably for this edition, which is surely of interest to the reader, seems to be justified. As more verified information becomes available closer to the event date, the article can be further expanded. I believe having a well-sourced preliminary article now is preferable to waiting until the last minute. intforce (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The time for an article about an event is not "a year out", it's "when there's substantive things to say about it beyond just 'this is a thing that will happen'". Bearcat (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Meh. This is crystallbalish but useful, and there are already some sources about the upcoming program. Yes, technically we might be justfied with dratifying this for a while, but seriously, this is make-work that is pointless. We know this event will be notable. Why waste time moving it out from mainspace and back?
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 00:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to International Chopin Piano Competition. Doesn't need a seperate article, IMO.— Iadmctalk  12:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment anything could happen to stop the competition from taking place! WP:NOTCRYSTAL. I do note that the other events have their own articles but they are full of information after the fact. Draftify is another option — Iadmctalk  12:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
anything could happen to stop the competition from taking place is not what WP:NOTCRYSTAL implies. The competition is just as likely to take place as the next Olympics or the next World Cup, all of which are events which fulfil WP:NOTCRYSTAL criteria: the event is notable, almost certain to take place, and preparations are in progress. intforce (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The competition is certainly notable. Previous competitions have been won by very notable performers. The fact that is going to take place all else being equal and is in preparation is not in doubt. My worry is that this is just a place holder for the event to come which is notable only for being the 100th anniversary. I still vote merge and create the article when the Competition is over — Iadmctalk  12:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – looks like 3/4 reliable independent sources exist discussing it. Sources will only ramp up in the future. Seems useful to have a solid starting ground for a quick-moving event like this. Aza24 (talk) 18:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:44, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apoapsis Records

Apoapsis Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

article reads like an advertisement (fails WP:NOTADVERT), with an overreliance on primary sources, for a record label with only two artists signed (fails WP:INHERITORG). if any part of this article can be salvaged at all, it would work better as a part of either Vasileios Angelis or Apostolos Angelis (composer), or simply redirected to either of these two pages. Free Realist 9 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We need ONE redirect. target article, a closer shouldn't be flipping a coin.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:43, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone, I noticed the article is nominated for deletion. While this article is one of my first contributions under this username, I've been a longtime Wikipedia editor committed to following notability guidelines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability). The flagged concern regarding promotional content seems like a misunderstanding. My intent is always to provide a well-sourced and informative article about a notable or "worthy of notice" subject. Suggestions for improvement and collaboration to bring the article up to Wikipedia's standards are always welcome. Thank you all for your time and consideration. OrangedJuice (talk) 15:48, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still waiting for participants to decide on one Merge/Redirect target article. One of those suggested is actually a Redirect, not an article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ultimately, I think what needs to happen before merging is for a referendum on the notability of the target musicians. This AfD should be tabled until that's decided. Chubbles (talk) 20:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Back Porch Records

Back Porch Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NORG, was unable to find any significant coverage other than brief mentions. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Wisconsin. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or Merge. I'm confused as to why this was taken to AfD at all. The nominator initially redirected it to a list page of EMI sublabels, which I reverted because it was not subject to any discussion, nothing was merged, and the target had no information about the label. The nominator then immediately brought it to AfD, when the obvious thing to do would be to start a merge discussion; I mean, for Pete's sake, this label put out full lengths from people like Frank Black, Shannon McNally, Charlie Sexton, and John Hammond Jr., so of course we don't want a redlink here. Chubbles (talk) 05:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 16:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please remember to sign your comments and if you are proposing a Redirect or Merge, identify a target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Although the artists associated with Back Porch Records clearly pass the WP:NBASIC threshold, the label can't inherit that notability per WP:NOTINHERITED. I was able to find a couple mentions: Aspen Times and Billboard but those are just mentions. Seems like Back Porch Records itself might best be served as mentions on Universal Music and/or Virgin Records pages? MertenMerten (talk) 19:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Recent !votes for delete have surfaced (the NOTINHERITED concerns are misplaced, I think; there's no reason for us to cover a label but for the fact that it published notable artists), but why would we prefer a redlink over a merge to the parent label? Chubbles (talk) 23:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. If this article were Merged, what would be the Merge target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Probably the best merge target would be Narada Records, its parent label for most of its run, per [8] (note that this source calls it "a major force in roots and Americana music styles"). Chubbles (talk) 14:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chubbles, Narada Records is a redirect. If you use one of the commonly used script, you'd see this because it's in a green font color. Liz Read! Talk! 03:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its target, Narada Productions, would be the target then. In practice, people often call this label Narada Records. Chubbles (talk) 04:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep I find WP:NOTINHERITED to be a major detriment to Wikipedia as a whole. We cannot limit the scope of knowledge in such a way and consider this project complete. This is a strong keep. Fireandflames2 (talk) 19:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Total lack of SIRS coverage. There are good reasons why companies need to meet NORG. JoelleJay (talk) 03:03, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is redlinking this title preferable when there is a clear merge target? (Leaving aside that the label certainly meets WP:MUSIC's sense of an important indie label.) Chubbles (talk) 06:38, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Narada Productions per above. Special:WhatLinksHere/Back_Porch_Records indicates that this should remain bluelinked, but there's a lack of sigcov for a keep. (It's possible that a future target could be an article for Back Porch Record's founder Ken Pedersen, though there aren't enough sources visible to establish GNG currently). ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 07:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Music Proposed deletions