Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lana Wolf (2nd nomination)
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 23:21, 30 April 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 23:21, 30 April 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Lana Wolf (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)
Fails WP:MUSIC. Many Ghits, but almost all are social networking or promotional in nature. I'm not finding anything that indicates that she meets the inclusion guidelines, but as she is Dutch, it's possible that there is something I'm missing, but a quick look at w:nl:Lana Wolf shows the same reliance on non-independent sources as this version. Horologium (talk) 01:11, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:40, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. She's had a top 40 hit in the Netherlands, and coverage from Google News suggests that she is notable: [1], [2], [3]. Non-English Wikipedia articles are often a poor indicator of available sources as for some reason unsourced articles seem to be considered acceptable in some WP languages.--Michig (talk) 13:52, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 15:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:57, 14 July 2012 (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.