Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ally Brooke (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to Fifth Harmony. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric  13:24, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Ally Brooke
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Since the last afD, the only thing that changed is the release of "Look At Us Now". Per WP:NSONG, it hasn't entered a notable national chart, only two component charts. I believe it doesn't make her notable as a solo artist. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 07:20, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 07:26, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. One song charted in an acceptable Billboard chart per WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS, meets notability criteria per WP:MUSICBIO. - The   Magnificentist  08:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect To Fifth Harmony article. The significant references point to her within the context of that group. As cited above, there is a billboard chart appearance, but the accomplishment really belongs to the group Lost Kings. She is credited as one of two "featured" guest. It is the only thing that can be argued to establish stand alone notability outside of Fifth Harmony. Noting that meeting criteria specify's that an artist "may" be notable rather than "is", I contend a single example isn't enough, especially when the weight of the achievement belongs to someone else. ShelbyMarion (talk) 12:57, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Maybe the song is charted only because of Ally Brooke? All of Lost Kings' charted songs are collaborations with vocalists. I don't think the accomplishment belongs to Lost Kings alone. - The   Magnificentist  15:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * They are the lead artist. Even if as a feature Brooke is the reason it charted in that component chart, it doesn't justify a stand-alone article. That little information can be included in her section, which she has in a Wikipedia article. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 20:09, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  04:33, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I think per WP:COMMONSENSE, it is reasonable for this 'rising star' to have her own article as it's blatantly obvious that there will be more charted songs and the likeliness of suddenly becoming non-notable is just not possible. She will definitely receive more coverage. I know my point is negated by WP:CRYSTAL but with the current sources and charted songs easily seeing her meet WP:GNG, WP:MUSICBIO and WP:BASIC, all the relevant criteria have been met and whether the article should be deleted because all the information is on the band's article is a matter of opinion and in mine, I think the article will only expand bigger as time goes by and that it will eventually be re-created again. Reasons to have the article deleted will get lesser. Similar articles (Zayn Malik, Louis Tomlinson) are proof. They were nominated for deletion in the past but eventually became notable and there's no reason to delete them now. - The   Magnificentist  07:25, 28 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect to group article. "Commonsense" called on above is an excuse to make Wikipedia a crystal ball. We do not know what will happen in the future and have to base are decisions on things as they stand now.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:01, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * John, but would you not consider the fact this article meets the relevant criteria like GNG and MUSICBIO. Don't you think that's all needed for the article to survive deletion? My comment above was just to emphasise that the article doesn't need deletion as she might get even more notable in the future. The basic criteria are met. - The   Magnificentist  15:27, 29 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect She has not gained notability outside the group and the article must remain back to Redirect Fifth Harmony#Ally Brooke --- WeLcOmE tO tHe nEw MiLlEnIuM ( Talk ) 02:21, 29 June 2017 (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.