Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Music

WP:DSMUSIC

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:

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.
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

List of Drum Corps International World Championship finalists

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

I don’t know what to make of this. WP:NOTADATABASE. Hodgepodge of unsourced statistics. MOS:ACCESS violations that I don’t even know how to begin to address. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Music. Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sky Hundred

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

There are only two articles worth of media coverage on this record as of writing this and neither of them are even long enough to prove its notability. An alternative to deletion in this case would be to draftify this article and wait for more lengthy and meaningful coverage about this album. lunaeclipse ⚧ ^(talk) 17:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and South Korea. lunaeclipse ⚧ ^(talk) 17:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify per nom, there is not enough coverage to meet WP:NALBUMS criterion 1 or to indicate that the subject meets the other criteria. Given that it was a recent surprise release and that the artist's other work has been covered by Pitchfork, Consequence of Sound, Far Out Magazine, The Fader, and Paste, I think it can be reasonably assumed that significant coverage will start appearing soon that can be used to build a draft until the notability criteria to move to the mainspace is met. Second best option would be merging the article's content to Parannoul and creating a redirect to there. LeMeilleurMiel (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per nomination and redirect to artist's page. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify looks the way to go. I believe this will be notable. PuppyMonkey (talk) 21:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This was released only few days ago on streaming services and so there haven’t been many international reviews yet, but there has been a few like https://www.brooklynvegan.com/mavi-oso-oso-parannoul-fucked-up-ravyn-lenae-larry-june-reviews/. There’s more media coverage in Korean but they might fit in the category of routine music coverage. It’s Rate Your Music’s #1 album of 2024 thanks to Parannoul’s dishard fans, PuppyMonkey thinks this will be notable, there’s no point in removing a page that will be notable in a few weeks. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 08:03, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denis Ingoldsby

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

Fails WP:GNG.Theroadislong(talk) 22:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Fails all WP:GNG.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Theroadislong (talk) 22:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:38, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boketo Media

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

No indication of independent notability per WP:CORP. In a WP:BEFORE search, I can't find any coverage in secondary WP:RS, and only the two primary sources cited actually mention the company. The company's founder appears to be notable as a YouTube comedian and producer, and the company claims some notable clients, but on Wikipedia notability is not inherited. Wikishovel (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Tennessee. Wikishovel (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Nothing meeting WP:ORGCRIT. I likely would have went speedy. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:02, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References that failed verification have been removed and the first paragraph has been revised to remove promotional tone. The company, though not extensively covered in secondary sources, plays a crucial role in the success of notable artists mentioned in the article. This indirect impact, while not always explicitly mentioned in media, is significant in the context of the artists' achievements and industry presence. Boketo Media's contributions to the independent music and media scenes, through its work with notable clients, warrant recognition and justify its inclusion on Wikipedia. KelliverLucklile (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mac & Cheese 2

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

I have tried to find citations, but only came up with a blog review, which you will see in the article. The artist is well known, but this is a mixtape and not an album, without any proper coverage. Sharamoscar (talk) 03:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. Sharamoscar (talk) 03:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to French Montana, mixtapes are almost never notable, and this isn’t an exception. Mach61 11:56, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This list from HotNewHipHop mentions a few songs from this mixtape in detail, and this article from Complex has a dedicated section for it. It's not much, and probably not enough on its own, but it's a start and enough for me to abstain from voting. If I were to vote, however, I would suggest French Montana discography#Mixtapes as a redirect target rather than the artist's page itself. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:10, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Road Music Services

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

Article about a media company, which I believe meets the following reasons for deletion:

#7, lack of reliable sources; #8, notability. I cannot find evidence that this company is notable. When looking for outside coverage, most of what my search turned up was either material on the company's website, LinkedIn pages, or job listings. Of the page's nine current references, four are primaries from the company's own site. In the first third-party reference, the Time article, the company isn't mentioned until more than halfway through the article. The ONErpm link is dead. The Television Academy link contains only a passing mention, and the Rolling Stone article doesn't mention the company by name at all. The Billboard article does focus on the company but looks suspiciously like a press release, and Billboard hasn't been assessed one way or the other in the list of reliable sources.
#1, copyright violation. The history section in the article is a thin, uncredited reword of an advertising blurb in the company's website and also used elsewhere, such as here. While there's a reference in the first paragraph, the reference doesn't include that text or clarify its origins.
There's also apparent conflict of interest; most of the article was written by a handful of accounts that have done little other editing, and then only on pages about artists connected to this company. One of the accounts, LynnGrossman, is also the name of the company owner, as given in the Time article (on page 3).
Additionally, if this page is deleted, the redirect Secret road should also be deleted.

Altogether, the impression I get is of an article that was written as advertising by people connected to the subject. Additionally, the company's website promo copy seems to have been paraphrased in the article body without context or attribution. And, even if the page were rewritten completely by outsiders, the company still isn't notable. Moonreach (talk) 16:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, Management, Australia, California, New York, and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Blatantly obvious WP:ADMASQ and WP:COI. Fails NCORP. Graywalls (talk) 05:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dugga Elo

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

Fails WP:NSONG and WP:GNG. Mentions, an interview, and other unreliable sources. CNMall41 (talk) 06:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 06:43, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - page has enough coverage of these sources that WP:GNG passes.
103.102.136.170 (talk) 12:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't check for more sources because I don't know Indian media well enough, but I can say that this is clearly not a GNG pass as is. I'll refrain from voting in case more can be found, but as is redirecting to Monali Thakur discography#Non-film songs would make the most sense to me. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Enough coverage" speaks to quantity, not quality. Can IP point to the sources that are considered reliable and significant to prove WP:NSONG?--CNMall41 (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant guideline would be WP:NEWSORGINDIA. An example would be this reference which based on this recent discussion cannot be used to establish notability. No byline or editorial oversight. Outside of NEWSORGINDIA, another reference would be this which is from the creator of the show. Then this which is an interview so not independent. Being that this would need to meet WP:SONG, I do not see any reference that shows that it 1) is on a national chart, 2) won a significant award, or 3) been independently released by numerous artists. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Upon review, I found that these sources are from WP:NEWSORGINDIA, which cannot establish notability. The article fails to meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. The sources include interviews and sponsored articles. GrabUp - Talk 05:00, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NSONG and WP:GNG. General google hits does not verify the GNG or WP:NSONG. Youknow? (talk) 10:19, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strangers Helping Strangers

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

Eighteen years without a source on the page for this local charity is enough. A Google news search yields only passing mentions of the organization, and uses of the common phrase in other contexts. BD2412 T 22:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Vermont. BD2412 T 22:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. 18 years is too long of a grace period Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 22:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Music. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dead! (song)

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Dead! (song) (3rd nomination)

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

As much as I would love to see more article about My Chemical Romance, I don't believe that this one fits the bill for notability per WP:NSONG. While the song is indeed certified, none of the sources on the page (save for the ones concerning the certification itself) have the song as its primary subject, rather they are listicles concerning the album or the band's discography as a whole. Furthermore, a customary WP:BEFORE check nets the same conclusion (and as the author of a different article on The Black Parade, I can further attest to this, as I've naturally seen a lot of articles on the album's songs). Leafy46 (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it didn't seem to automatically include them, here are references to the previous nominations:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead!

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead! (2nd Nomination) Leafy46 (talk) 15:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. C F A 💬 15:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the certifications and multiple high rankings among the band's songs are plenty for notability. The articles may not all be primarily about this song, but that doesn't mean they aren't valuable in terms of notability. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:30, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I think there's a difference between just getting a sentence thrown in a review and getting a whole dedicated section of a list article like this song has in multiple of the included sources. Those sections are primarily about this song, and I would think that counts for something. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 15:34, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NSONG, certifications "indicate only that a song may be notable, not that it is notable", and "if the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created". There are a few sources which do speak about the song as part of the band's discography as a whole, however I don't know if those are sufficient to prove its notability. Leafy46 (talk) 15:40, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Makhna

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

Fails WP:NSONG. Can be redirected to Yo Yo Honey Singh. Charliehdb (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, and Music. Charliehdb (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International Villager

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

Fails WP:NSONG. Can be redirected to Yo Yo Honey Singh. Charliehdb (talk) 13:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, and Music. Charliehdb (talk) 13:20, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: "the highest grossing Punjabi album of all time" sounds like a claim to notability, but is unfortunately sourced to a listicle that just doesn't have the ring of rigour to it. If there's alternative sources for that claim, I'd be tempted to say keep on that basis. -- D'n'B-t -- 13:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Yo Yo Honey Singh, this is the only English-language source I could find that was useful for notability purposes. Mach61 09:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A search for the Hindi title (इंटरनेशनल विलेजर) also failed to find anything useful. Mach61 09:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Loca (Honey Singh song)

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

Fails WP:NSONG. Can be redirected to Yo Yo Honey Singh. Charliehdb (talk) 13:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, and Music. Charliehdb (talk) 13:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manto (musician)

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

I'm not finding much of anything in a BEFORE search on this musician other than YouTube videos of a few of their performances. None of the usual press reviews of notable musicians. The article is part of a walled garden on the Munshi/Munsi family. Of the current citations, the Ghosh book is used as a source in all of these Munsi articles, and it is not clear if it is a connected source. The Eklund source is connected as an extended family member. The musician does not meet inclusion criteria for WP:NMUSICIAN nor WP:GNG. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, India, and West Bengal. Netherzone (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 18:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:32, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duke Concept

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

This is a company therefore GNG/WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. The sourcing relies entirely on interviews with people connected with the company, announcements, or mentions in passing due to their involvement in organising events, those sources do not contain any in-depth "Independent Content" about the company. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Events, Organizations, and Companies. HighKing⁺⁺ 17:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Nigeria and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:50, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- just wanted to contribute as the writer of the article. I wrote it after reading about the company's focus on work in the black diaspora, which aligned with a wiki project I've been involved with on and off. I did look closely at the sources for this article, because I know the ones I was using to establish notability (references 1-3) have interview content within them, but in looking at each article overall it seemed that there was significant content outside of the interview quotations, and that that content contained independent analysis- including looking at the wider industry context they are operating in, with statistics etc included in that. I also looked at the publications and writers to make sure they were both independent from the subject and engage in fact checking as part of their editorial process. I know 100% interview content does not establish notability, but I feel it is fairly uncommon for independent articles on companies or the people behind them not to structure their articles around a fair amount of interview content. The fact the company were also included in a way that was more than a passing mention in other major stories on Afrobeats, like the Rolling Stone one, suggested to me notability within the Afrobeats industry. Anyway, I just wanted to engage and outline why I used the sources I did. Thanks Thebookstamper (talk) 19:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point to specific paragraphs in the sources that contain in-depth "Independent Content" about the *company* that you believe meets the criteria for establishing notability? HighKing⁺⁺ 18:03, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if this is a bit messy, I'm doing it on the fly, so haven't gone through all the sources. Appreciate it might not be the most forensic exercise because of that... Thanks for your time.

In the Pulse article:

(Citing these as examples of content about the company, not directly generated by something the company has said, or paraphrasing. They may reference something said by the company, but as I see it are writing their own analysis around that. Or the company is then responding to a point made by the publication.)

Section: ‘The show which became a lesson’

Coupled with the rise of social media, that show contributes to how Ugeh now perceives social media as a marketing tool. These days, his team studies social media based on demographics. Some artists are stronger on Facebook than Twitter or TikTok while others are bigger on Instagram. Some artists are also big on the four. An artist’s audience determines social media marketing and engagement is a key metric for measurement. While Ugeh admits that social media has aided event companies, he admits that social media phenomena should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Section: ‘What’s the process of organising a show at Duke Concept’

Sometimes, unplanned artists also approach the team through their booking agents The team then uses a data-driven approach to see where the artists can sell and whether Duke Concept would be willing to tour those places. These days, the events happen in mid-range markets to big markets. It’s unlikely that Duke Concept would take an Afrobeat artist to a small and predominantly white market like Milwaukee, Wisconsin at this time [...]

It makes sense. The attitude of a city like Boston to touring and nightlife would be much different to that of smaller markets. The pulse of young attendees also matters as much as their priorities. It's more likely that a 21-year-old, who was bred in New York would be willing to spend $200 on a ticket than his equivalent in a smaller market. Ugeh offers it from a perspective of comparative analysis, not with factual totality. As much as urban culture influences pop culture, the rising state of Afrobeats suggests that the racial spread of America must be taken into consideration while planning an event for an Afrobeats artist.

Section: 'Pricing'

(In response to Ugeh referencing fair pricing set by Duke Concept):

But pricing also depends on the format of the venue. As much as Duke Concept might charge $250 for front row seats in a seated theatre, the people at the back might pay as low as $30. While ticketing is already booming, secondary ticketing has grown a life of its own. Market Watch reports that, “The global Secondary Tickets market size is projected to reach USD 2755.5 million by 2027, from USD 1502 million in 2020, at a CAGR of 9.1% between 2021-2027.” Ugeh believes that there is nothing anybody can do about it. He believes that the best way to fight it is to encourage people to purchase their tickets early enough, discourage hoarding of tickets and to always make tickets available at the venue.

WMV article:

(Including this para as an example of referencing another source- an interview given to a different publication, not their own):

The Nigerian moved to New York City with his family a decade ago and shortly after; launched the company. In the early days tried to do an Afro-Caribbean showcase with headliners Timaya and Mavado in 2014, he told Pulse it was a “flop”. He references that show as growing pains but one lesson he learned was that; Caribbean events are marketed differently from African events- mainly Afro-music require digital promotions while at the time reggae- dancehall events required linear advertising, along with street “posters”and guerrilla marketing.

Rolling Stone:

Now, there’s plenty more evidence that Afrobeats is connecting in the U.S. Last October, Burna Boy became the first African solo artist to headline the Hollywood Bowl; this year, he’s slated to play Madison Square Garden, the first headlining performance for a Nigerian musician at the storied New York venue. Duke Concept, the production company behind the shows, was founded by Osita Ugeh in 2013, two years after he moved to the United States from Nigeria. The business initially had to be scrappy, producing concerts at small nightclubs and DIY warehouses — some of the only venues available to Afropop artists at the time.

Today, things look much different. In 2018, Duke Concept secured a partnership with Live Nation, and last year spearheaded the U.S. tours of African acts such as Wizkid, Omah Lay, Olamide, Adekunle Gold, and Diamond Platnumz.

Billboard:

Osita “Duke” Ugeh, who, as CEO of promoter Duke Concept, has been booking U.S. tours for African acts like Burna for the last decade. (He secured Burna’s first sold-out U.S. show in April 2019 at Harlem’s Apollo Theater — where he again made history as the first Afrobeats artist to sell out the venue.) But as Ugeh knows well, Burna’s arrival at the Garden was far from preordained. Since founding Duke Concept in 2013, he has struggled to get artists like him into big rooms. Now, as Afrobeats continues to expand its reach, Ugeh says he and his 15-person team are starting to see that reflected in the kind of venues the genre’s artists can play: He has gone from booking two to three U.S. tours for Afrobeats artists a year to booking two to three a month, with Davido, Tiwa Savage, Rema and more scheduled for later this year.

When his “One Night in Space” show at the Garden was announced in December, Duke Concept launched a joint venture with Live Nation, expanding upon a relationship that began in 2018, when Burna himself approached the company about a tour deal. He insisted on bringing Ugeh along; subsequently, UTA’s Christian Bernhardt, Burna’s touring agent, introduced Ugeh to Live Nation’s director of touring, Andy Messersmith. Thebookstamper (talk) 19:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment and edit. Thanks to Thebookstamper for the comprehensive response but I don't agree that the extracted paragraphs provide sufficient in-depth information about the company. The Pulse article extracts are either commenting on or repeating comments made by the company or providing stats about the secondary ticketing market. The WMV article talks about the founder (not the company) and does not have any in-depth information about the company. The Rolling Stone article has a (generic) sentence describing the company and also repeats an announcement about securing a partnership - neither sufficiently detailed. The Billboard article is again about the founder or the partnership, not the company and does not provide any "Independent Content" by way of analysis/commentary/etc, just repeats information already provided by the company. HighKing⁺⁺ 09:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HighKing, please change this !vote into a comment, it is double dipping with your nome statement. Mach61 03:32, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks! HighKing⁺⁺ 13:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Have to agree with the nom that none of the sources that cover this subject in detail are sufficiently independent; w/r/t Thebookstamper’s argument that the articles which have interview content have non-interview content as well, I would note that just because a statement isn't in quotation marks doesn't mean it was a journalist's own independent writing; it may be a paraphrase of what the subject said during the interview, or information provided by the subject in a press kit or such. Mach61 09:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passed the guideline WP:GNG very clearly, as i have understood it. Faizi Dehlvi (talk) 18:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Faizi Dehlvi, the appropriate guidelines for companies includes WP:NCORP which sets out the requirements for sourcing. Can you point to 2 sources (including paragraph/page) where the content meets the requirements? Thank you. HighKing⁺⁺ 10:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The subject passes notability guidelines for Organization.Have a look into this article [1] Sanzeb (talk) 18:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sanzeb, I've already looked (and commented) on the Rolling Stone article and it makes exactly two mentions of the company, and nothing that you would call in-depth about the company and also relies entirely on information provided by Ugeh and the company, so not "Independent Content" either. Can you explain the content in that article you say passes WP:NCORP? Also, to pass NCORP, multiple sources are required. HighKing⁺⁺ 10:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you also comment on how you popped up after over 2 years of not editing here (and before that, hardly any editing at all), just to !vote at this AfD? Not exactly an area for inexperienced editors to participate in. HighKing⁺⁺ 10:50, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Subject does not appear to pass WP:NCORP. TarnishedPath^talk 01:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don’t especially agree with the recent keep contributions, but would say Keep for this one, looking at the main refs- pulse and wmv articles are more than only interviews, following discussion above. Or Draftify if not- maybe it’s borderline right now but could be more notable with time. Editing84 (talk) 02:38, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editing84 it isn't just "interviews", we need in-depth "Independent Content" which isn't simply regurgitating company/exec provided info. Nothing in Pulse and WMV that isn't repeating company info that I can see - what bits are you referring to? I've no objections to Draftify either. HighKing⁺⁺ 13:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion those refs had both significant coverage and were independant enough- esp as the whole focus of the articles is on the company, so didn't seem surprising or controversial that the content would revolve around company info. Editing84 (talk) 18:35, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:50, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Road 2 Soulwave

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

Fails WP:NSONG, nothing much to add. Apart from the several unreferenced sections, this article makes no credible claim of importance or significance for the song. The musician himself is non-notable too. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Nigeria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boardmasters Festival line-ups

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

Contested WP:BLAR. Article is a huge magnet for WP:FANCRUFT that currently cites only one source. Only verifiable source to back the information is a WP:SPS: the website itself. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 21:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Events, and United Kingdom. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 21:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is only 1 source and that does not establish notability. Dympies (talk) 15:33, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Largely unsourced. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 22:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although largely unsourced at the moment, it is clear that enough sources do exist to sustain this page (I've already managed to reference the first two years, and it's obvious to me from a quick internet search that there will be sources for other years too). It being potential fancruft does not speak to whether it should be deleted - notability is established by the reliable sources which exist elsewhere. Overall, yes, this page is poorly written, but I think that's a surmountable problem. I'll keep cleaning it up in the meantime, but I do think this one's worth keeping. Gazamp (talk) 13:02, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This isn't Woodstock by a long shot. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Now that the self-published source has been removed and better sources are being added, I think this discussion should primarily focus on whether the subject is notable (i.e. by assessing the sources). WP:FANCRUFT itself is not a rationale for deletion. Gazamp (talk) 11:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the improvements by @Gazamp, there are many WP:RS discussing the line-ups of the notable Boardmasters Festival - and the content may be due it's own page per WP:SPINOFF. ResonantDis_tortion 07:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: now that work has been done on adding improved sources I don't see it would be controversial for this article to stay. Editing84 (talk) 19:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting after article changes. Please review current article after additions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, this list definitely can be verified, and deletion is not cleanup. The question is whether this information should exist on the wiki at all, and IMO it should. It's no more crufty than e.g. comprehensive record label discographies, of which there are plenty. Mach61 18:22, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Music Proposed deletions