Talk:S. J. Tucker

Untitled comments
- Working on verifying all sources, adding citations, and contacting artist's management about specific interviews, tour dates, etc. Thanks! Satyrblade 69 (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC) (Feb. 19, 2007)

- Moving article to stub: singer-songwriters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyrblade 69 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC) Satyrblade 69 (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

- Artist is notable for collaborations with cited artists, activists and projects. Citations have been provided. Further citations of importance are being researched, and will be added shortly. Thanks! Satyrblade 69 (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

- Artist is further noteworthy because of cited collaborations with other parties already listed on Wikipedia. Said collaborations are cited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyrblade 69 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC) Satyrblade 69 (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC) Satyrblade 69 (talk) 20:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * My two cents. Satyrblase, the problem appears to be on the quality (or lack of quality) of the links. Basically, looking at Notability, I find no Significant coverage except a niche magazine called "Newwitch magazine" "For Witches, Pagans, Goddess-worshippers and seekers 18-and-up who want practical ideas about magical living in a post-modern world.", no reliable sources since many are personal blogs or pages on self-publishing sites, and those links are not Independent of the subject since they appear to be written by S.J. Tucker herself or by her publishing house. Basically, this artist has done some good work and participated on some albums, and talked about on a niche magazine, looks like on the way to more fame, but is still not notable enough and will need a few years of hard work to become notable enough for other people to talk about her and warrant her inclusion at wikipedia. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Meh, she could qualify actually as a niche artist, since there are several niche magazines on her references. I change my position for deletion to mild keep, and will let others take the decision. This page could actually be discused for deletion Articles_for_deletion instead of being speedily deleted, but I think I have involved myself too much already. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Enric. And yes, there are more articles about her, in other publications. I have contacted her manager in reference to that material - I don't have it on hand, myself. When he gets back to me (she is playing at the Folk Alliance festival in Memphis this week), I will update this entry with more information. Satyrblade 69 (talk) 23:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I have removed the speedy tag. While there are some valid arguments for deletion, there are not grounds for speedy deletion which is only for articles that clearly have no place on wikipedia. Anyone who believes that this page should be deleted can start a discussion on the subject. Jon513 (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I tagged this for speedy deletion rather than simply deleting it myself because I wanted to see if something like this would happen, and it has. The article did not seem to me to have sufficient notability but I recognized that the possibility of different opinions existed, so I wanted to get different eyes on it. I agree with User:Enric Naval and User:Jon513 that the articles for deletion process is perhaps more appropriate here, to get a sense of the opinions of the wider Wikipedian community, and will undertake to remove my own speedy tag (and associated hangon tag) and take it through AfD without adding my !vote. Accounting4Taste: talk 23:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope, I've changed what's left of my mind (sigh). I looked over the article one more time and, while I don't understand everything that's going on here, I'm going to accept that the notability and citations are sufficient.  If someone else wants to take this to AfD, they're welcome.  Accounting4Taste: talk 00:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Not only are there articles in other publications, and collaborations with artists already appearing on Wikipedia, SJ appears at established events such as Pagan Unity Festival as a featured artist. The nature of what she does and her target audience is of necessity going to mean that she's not featured in Spin or Rolling Stone; her niche is a smaller one, but she is well-established in it. I'm glad this is going to be left for a while to accumulate more content rather than be summarily deleted. :) I may be biased, as I happen to know the subject, but separate from that I think she's notable. --Parcequilfaut (talk) 00:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Article name
I'm afraid the name of this article doesn't match Wikipedia standards. When a subject is known primarily by their initials, it should be spelled out as S. J. Tucker. I realize that Tucker's initials are often used without periods, but since her own web site uses them (sometimes), we have to consider the no-periods presentation a typographic choice not the official spelling of her name. And even though many people (including me) think it looks awkward to have a space between initials, that's WP policy. - JasonAQuest (talk) 13:06, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. There's a lot of variation in how the name is written in official publications. Album covers show both SJ and S.J. (perhaps even S. J.). Changing the article title to conform to Wikipedian norms would be just fine. - Kenllama/ (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've moved the page and updated the redirect at S.J. Tucker. - JasonAQuest (talk) 03:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

The Wendy Trilogy
I've tagged The Wendy Trilogy to be merged with this article because the article doesn't indicate sufficient independent notability. It's apparently one of Tucker's more significant works, and as such it should be covered in the article about her. Most of the info in that article is a straight synopsis of the song cycle, which isn't the purpose of a Wikipedia article. If this subtopc develops enough to require its own article, it can be "spun off" at that time, but there isn't enough info at this point to require that. I propose that the encyclopedic info in The Wendy Trilogy be merged into this article, and that article be redirected to this one. - JasonAQuest (talk) 03:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with the merge, at least until TWT gets more independent recognition as an entity. --Parcequilfaut (talk) 16:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Literary Collaborations
With the Rabbit's Song children's book preparing for release, S.J. now has three literary collaborations to her name. Do these warrant their own section under the discography? --Parcequilfaut (talk) 16:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)