Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freeman Arthur

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Freeman Arthur (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)

Non-notable new musician, does not meet WP:MUSICBIO. One EP with non-charting material. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 02:31, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non-notable musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:53, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete- pioneer musician for ending the bro country era in country music with revolutionary sound

do not delete This musician meets requirement #10 by having made appearances on 650 AM WSM as well as The Heartland Network

Do not delete- Multiple news headlines as well as publications about this musician

Don't Delete Facebook has awarded this artist verification— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleyshay (talk • contribs) 21:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

— Note to closing admin: Ashleyshay (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.

(1) We do not keep articles based on subjective assertions of significance like "ending the bro country era in country music with revolutionary sound"; until a reliable source explicitly credits him with that, it means nothing. (Especially since I just checked a couple of his YouTube videos, and completely fail to see what's revolutionary about his sound — sure, he draws on an older country sound instead of sounding like Florida Georgia Line, but there's nothing inherently innovative about trying to bring Randy Travis-style traditionalism back.)

(2) Criterion #10 requires a national network, not an individual radio station, so WSM doesn't constitute a notability claim in any way, shape or form. Heartland Network might count for something, but not just because you assert it — you must reliably source that he got playlisted on the Heartland Network for that claim to count for anything.

(3) Multiple news headlines as well as publications? Kindly show some, because there are exactly zero of either being cited in the article as written.

(4) Facebook verification is not "awarded" as a "prize", but is given to anybody who fulfills the process needed to get their account verified — I could get my Facebook account "verified" if I cared to follow those steps, and I'm a nobody — and it does not constitute a notability claim in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 22:19, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – I have removed boldface from three comments above, all of which were posted by the same user, Ashleyshay. Only one formal !vote is allowed, but feel free to comment all you'd like. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:48, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:49, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• delete - Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:NN in general. Appears to have no WP:RS at all, just associated sources (own twitter, website etc) KylieTastic (talk) 17:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No claim to passing WP:NMUSIC, and no reliable source coverage shown to get him over WP:GNG. No prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can source him better than this, but Wikipedia is not a free public relations platform on which a musician automatically gets an article just because his own self-published PR or his social networking presence verifies that he exists. Bearcat (talk) 22:19, 24 September 2016 (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.