Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksi Perälä


 * 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 Keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Withdrawn by nominator after additional sources have been provided which satisfy WP:GNG (non-admin closure) Polyamorph (talk) 12:52, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Aleksi Perälä

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Refs are interviews and profiles for a WP:BLP. Fails WP:SIGCOV.  scope_creep Talk  22:02, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Finland. Shellwood (talk) 22:16, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * keep I think the sources are reliable (e.g. https://ra.co/about / https://igloomag.com/about / http://anka.li/about / https://www.attackmagazine.com/about/ ) the coverage in depth. If you're waiting for the wall street journal to cover this subject you don't know electronic music. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:31, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. This is an artist who has released more music than any known artist on the planet, ever. If the wall street journal isn't interested in musical geniuses, how is that the artist's problem? Pam Embert (talk) 07:34, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  23:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
 * These are not valid sources. I've never seen anybody post four about pages, expecting them to be taken as vaid references.   scope_creep Talk  05:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Please if you could tell me what constitutes a reliable source so I can fix this, rather than it being taken down. There are plenty of sources about this artist out there, I just need guidance. Pam Embert (talk) 07:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Something that passes WP:MUSICBIO, or perhaps some Finish language sources, reviews of albums in major Finish newspapers and magazines or secondary references from mainstream music sites that satisfy WP:MUSICRS. Hope that helps.   scope_creep Talk  09:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The point of providing pointers to the about pages is to establish which of the sources used in the article are journalistic endeavours with editorial control, thus tending towards WP:RS. I can only suppose that you are being deliberately stupid, as a rhetorical flourish, in saying "I've never seen anybody post four about pages, expecting them to be taken as vaid references" The references are in the article, Scope Creep, as you well know. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. So he qualifies for point 5 by releasing on Clone, Rephlex and TRIP. And he also qualifies for point 7.
 * 5. Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable.
 * 7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
 * (Also, chuckling at how ignorant I was of the whole "notability" thing earlier. I get it now.) Pam Embert (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * And according to WP:MUSICRS the sites listed are valid (pitchfork, Exclaim!, Resident Advisor, The Wire etc etc.) Pam Embert (talk) 14:04, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Its been a very busy few days. I checked the references the first time around. We will through the references, to see what the WP:HEYMANN has lead to. Listing about pages doesn't necessarily the quality of the source for out purposes.    scope_creep Talk  18:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * "I've never heard of them" is not a valid reason to delete an article, and please refrain from calling (y)our colleagues stupid.  dxneo  (talk) 21:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Who stated they never heard of them, re above:   scope_creep Talk  14:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * , you said "These are not valid sources. I've never seen anybody post four about pages, expecting them to be taken as vaid references." which is pretty much close to my statement since it seems like it was the first time you came across such sources, anyway I did not mean to step on your toes.  dxneo  (talk) 14:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment Finnish-language sourcing appears non-existent based on a brief search. All I could find is this paywalled article from Etelä-Suomen Sanomat. It looks to be a bio of some sort based on the Kone Foundation grant, but I don't have access to the full text and thus can't say how much independent content there is beyond an interview. -Ljleppan (talk) 10:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It's weird but an artist who spent most of his career in the UK might not have much coverage in his home country. Especially if the country is Finland (a place where electronic music gets very little coverage, if any at all). I feel that shouldn't be a reason to disqualify an internationally renown artist. Surely it is more important that the entire world is mentioning him rather than his home country? Pam Embert (talk) 14:21, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep as per significant coverage in reliable sources cited in the article such as The Quietus and Resident Advisor (listed reliable at WikiProject Albums/Sources) as well as additional sources identified in this discussion so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:48, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I've not heard of the guy and i'm into some pretty obscure electronic bands from the Scandanavian counties like Biosphere and Manna . So lets look at the refs, in the first two blocks.
 * Ref 1 This is an interview and is not independent.
 * Ref 2 That is another interview and is not independent.


 * Ref 3 Genuine secondary review.
 * Ref 4 Profile review. Not in-depth.
 * Ref 5 WP:PRIMARY database generated profile.
 * Ref 6 That is another interview and is not independent.
 * Ref 7 Non-rs
 * Ref 8 Not specific. Tangenital.
 * Ref 9 Another secondary review.
 * Ref 10 That is another interview and is not independent.
 * Ref 11 Another interview and not independent.

I guess it is typical fare for a modern electronic musician. There is two independent reviews. So i'd say the WP:HEYMANN was successful. Nomination Withdrawn'   scope_creep Talk  15:31, 12 November 2023 (UTC)


 * 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.