Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dave Stewart (trombonist)

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 14:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Stewart (trombonist)

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

Article's only two citations are both dead links. A search for other reliable references on this individual only show his name appearing in lists of other musical performers. Does not appear to meet the notability guidelines for such performers. Failing the appearance of at least one reliable third party reference that is not trivial, I propose that the article be deleted. KDS4444^Talk 15:46, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Searching for the Shell/LSO competition, I see so many winners yet so few mentions of it by those who weren't winners that I don't believe it to be notable. Subject is not Principle Chair in LSO. I modified the search terms and still didn't find any secondary sources. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 16:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the article asserts LPO not LSO, either of which would be sufficiently notable, but I couldn't find that either. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:44, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:45, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:45, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Searching for sources is difficult as there's the far more notable Dave Stewart who played with National Health and Bruford (oh and some bloke who used to play with Annie Lennox). Anyway, an Allmusic page here shows he has appeared as a session player on multiple notable albums, and there are other passing mentions here, here, here, here confirming his reputation, plus a Sound on Sound article written by him here. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:50, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Weak delete' -- just a little under the notability bar for a freelance musician -- a permanent chair in the LSO or LPO would be enough for me or a solo recording at a high level, but being a session musician with some reviews by him isn't enough yet. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This source cites his then recent departure from the LPO. Another Sound on Sound source sees him going into depth about arranging and quotes him saying "here's a brief description of an orchestral session I did in September this year". It's published by a third party and going through their editorial standards, so I don't think it qualifies as self-published. He seems to be a semi-regular at SOS and other pieces written by him are here and here (although the National Health / Bruford Stewart has also written for them, so take care when searching for sources). Not the greatest claim to notability, but hopefully there's enough there to convince you he meets WP:GNG. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:21, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the additional refs. See changed vote above and below. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 17:19, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Also from me Ginosti (talk) 10:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep -- We have masses of articles on bands of whom I have never heard. I do not see why we should not keep articles on orchestral musicians. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:53, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. If so, the solution would be to cull the irrelevant bands, not to water down wikipedia further.Truth or consequences-2 (talk) 14:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:37, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep -- changed from weak delete above. Our criteria for notability for orchestral musicians (not from another rule, godforbid, but from precedent) is still quite nebulous and still too undefined to judge borderline cases with particular confidence, but Ritchie333 convinces me that the encyclopedia would be more helped than harmed with the inclusion of this article. I'd support a keep or no consensus judgment. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 17:19, 15 October 2013 (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.