Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Joan


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:43, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Big Joan

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:N and WP:MUSIC. Non notable breakcore artist. Doing one album which features a notable artist does not constitute notability. Also, there are no reliable third party sources. The Undead Never Die (talk) 20:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - If he fails specific guideline, then the article must not be kept, but if the album has charted, it turns the way all around. Eduemoni↑talk↓  01:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  — Logan Talk Contributions 12:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  — Logan Talk Contributions 12:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. I did find this, but that's nowhere near WP:MUSIC. Lucky not to have been speedied. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 19:14, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. The Gigwise article is fine as coverage and there's also this, this, and this. It's not an awful lot but enough to have a well-enough sourced stub. --Michig (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:MUSIC. There are a lack of reliable sources to prove its notability. Truthsort (talk) 17:56, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to discuss Michig's sources.  Sandstein   18:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The sources Michig provided do not establish notability. Truthsort (talk) 21:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I've always felt that when a band does not meet any of criteria 2-12 of WP:MUSIC, it should only be deemed notable on criterion #1 (independent third-party coverage) if it unequivocally meets this requirement - otherwise, we put a few mentions in the local paper in the same league as going on a national tour or entering the album/singles chart. The sources that have been found are some reviews in gigwise, one article in BBC News and one article from The Observer. The Observer article is about bands in Bristol in general which mentions Big Joan in one sentence, and the BBC News article is a local What's On article. The Gigwise coverage is better, and had there been more sources like this one there would have been a case for better coverage, but as Gigwise appears to be a website whose purpose is to cover as many gigs as possible, I'm afraid this isn't enough to get a meaningful encyclopaedic article out of it. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 06:56, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I would beg to differ - we already have a meaningful, sourced encyclopedia article here.--Michig (talk) 07:25, 12 August 2011 (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.