User talk:Unique freaq

Proposed deletion of Marshall Neal


The article Marshall Neal has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * No evidence could be found that he is notable. I can find his name in e.g. discogs.com, but he doesn't seem to have received any significant attention in reliable sources so far.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Marshall Neal for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marshall Neal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Marshall Neal until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I refactored your contribution to Articles for deletion/Marshall Neal for legibility and moved it to the correct place in the discussion.
 * I'm afraid your personal knowledge is not something that Wikipedia can use. We only report information that can be verified, and it must come from a reliable, published source. See WP:V and WP:RS. Your comment also suggests that you may have a conflict of interest in writing this article. Please read WP:COI.
 * The problem with the article is that you simply have not shown that the subject is notable. The only source in the article (malformed) appears to point to a book that only makes passing mention of this article's subject. See WP:MUSICBIO for the type of coverage that would be required. I'll comment on the new sources you have proposed in the AFD. Meters (talk) 23:53, 4 April 2017 (UTC)