Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmine Miranda

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 Delete. Michig (talk) 07:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Carmine Miranda

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

Fails WP:MUSICBIO and is a promotional article written by a paid editor. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:08, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 00:23, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 00:23, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: as far as I can see, the paid editor (Lilianarice) has made 3 edits to the article, I'd hardly describe her as the 'article writer'. Most of the time she requested the edits on the article talkpage and another editor did the work, which is pretty much by the book. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 00:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Regardless of paid editing issues, the current sources are very weak, and if better sources are out there, I couldn't find them. Grayfell (talk) 01:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Yes, big COI problem. I've taken a lot of hype out of the article. I think the article subject does, just barely, pass WP:MUSICBIO, with two recordings on a major, or at least reasonably established, label. AllMusic verifies those recordings. He did place in a major music competition, again, just barely (score 7.00, cutoff 7.00). Close call. This is classical; everything is smaller and lower-key than in pop.John Nagle (talk) 01:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:In response to this nomination for deletion, the article does NOT fail WP:MUSICBIO because the rules are that A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, instrumentalist, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria. Carmine Miranda does successfully meet those criteria in that:

1. He has been published 2 times in Fanfare Magazine [BACH: Six Cello Suites Fanfare Magazine Issue 36:5 (May/June 2013) May 1, 2013] which meets rule # 1: Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works. Unfortunately you have to pay in order to access the articles however you can also read them on the artist's website for free.

2. Carmine has released 2 albums with 2 prominent recording labels Label:Centaur Records["Bach: 6 Cello Suites - Carmine Miranda | Awards". AllMusic. 2013-02-26. Retrieved 2014-05-21.] and Navona Records["Piatti: 12 Caprices for Solo Cello". AllMusic. 2014-10-14. Retrieved 2014-11-16.] which complies with rule #5: Has released two or more albums on a major record label

3. Carmine Miranda has fulfills the requirement of having won or placed in a major music competition [

Alhambra Competition Winners Display Remarkable Musicianship Lawrence Budmen] and the IBLA International Competition[2012 IBLA GRAND PRIZE Competitions Results IBLA International Competition July 30, 2012].so satisfies rule #9

Once again, i reiterated in regards to this competition that it is scored from 1 to 10 and the artists are judged individually to assess their skill. So a 7.0 is not "barely" making it when you consider that it merits an awards and many walked away with only mentions for participation. I only ended up editing the article after declaring COI because John Nagle wrote that he placed last in the competition which was not true or neutral These cited references should show you that the subject Carmine Miranda does fulfill notability requirements. Thank you Lilianarice (talk) 01:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sorry don't mean to keep commenting. Just want to provide more sources since Grayfell said he couldn't find any. Here are articles were Carmines's work has been reviewed or interviewed[Have Cello, Will Travel: A Chat with Carmine Miranda Seen and Heard International May 4, 2014]. Music in Cincinatti has done several articles of Carmine's work. [1] [2] [3]. Lastly Music web also reviewed his latest album.[4]. Please understand that the classical music scene is not as big as pop music and for cellist even more so. However, given this, Carmine does meet the notability requirements and his article can continue to be improved upon with time as he does more work. Thank you Lilianarice (talk) 01:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some of those might be usable, but most of them seem like Wikipedia:Bombardment. I didn't say I couldn't find any sources, I said I couldn't find any that were better than what's already there, which is still mostly true. Musicincincinnati.com appears to be a blog with one author and no editorial oversight. Allmusic is a routine listing which fails to establish notability. Are those labels classified as major? Maybe, but I think that's up for debate. Fanfare is significant but I'm not sure it's important enough to trump the article's other problems. Still, it's the only source that causes any second doubts. Neither Seen and Heard International, nor Musicweb International appear to me to be WP:RS. Grayfell (talk) 02:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as promo crap that belongs elsewhere - There's plenty of ways to "advertise" a singer and this sure as hell isn't one of them. –Davey2010 • (talk) 03:12, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Greyfell's analysis of sources and despite Lilianarice's longwinded (paid) promotionalism on this page. I would add that one of the main sources, from RMTV, is WP:UGC "based soley upon the information submitted to us by the artists and their representatives." Logical Cowboy (talk) 03:27, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - despite the proponent's claims to the contrary, the article is very poorly sourced; a combination of local blog-style "my favourite song" type stuff and passing mentions of the subject in list of things that aren't enough to substantiate notability. The editor in question needs to stop editing articles where she has a conflict of interest. It isn't working. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:22, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I would like to note that as the page stands right now i haven't really been able to make improvements in its "promotional" content or lack of sources. I only was able to add the new album and change the IBLA competition wording but couldn't do more since i have COI. I would like to work on improving the page and make it non-promotional as well as to add other citations such as the review by Naxos of America [5], and the one by Cleveland Talent Magazine [6]Lilianarice (talk) 10:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't bother - more un-attributed user-generated content and promotional advertising. I don't think either would be considered a reliable source. St★lwart¹¹¹ 11:19, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails WP:MUSICBIO as has already been noted. Quis separabit? 15:03, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform. Stop rewarding bad faithed editing and delete spam. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:41, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lack of WP:RS for this article. --Artene50 (talk) 01:22, 24 November 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.