Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chase Coy (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 Delete  while apparent numbers favour keep, this is one case where arguments put forth for deletion are significantly more substantive. Gnangarra 04:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * after 5 deleton two via AFD I salted the article it'll require a review of new sources at WP:DRV before recreation Gnangarra 04:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Chase Coy
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Sourcing is problematic, notability is questionable. This seems to be more of a marketing tool than a biographical account of somebody with encyclopedic relevance. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep – Topic passes WP:GNG, per significant coverage in reliable sources:
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not meet WP:BAND. Fails #1 with only a single non-trivial reference (Seattle review) NJ.com ref is a trivial newspaper entertainment calendar entry.  While this artist is signed to a major label, still does not meet #5 as only 1 album has been released on that major label, others were independently released.  Possible G3 candidate as it was previously deleted through AFD, and admin would need to compare the versions to see if there has been significant improvement since then. RadioFan (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Sources: "Chase Coy making major label debut" from The Waterfront Journal, "Chase Coy brings boyish good looks, adult-sized talent to Bluebird Theater" from Wyoming Tribune Eagle, "Tour gets Coy out of house" from The Daily Progress, "Chase Coy, 'Picturesque'" from Billboard (brief mention), and "Signing Stories: Chase Coy" from Music Connection. These sources are unquestionably significant, with the exception of the Billboard one. However, I am unsure as to whether they establish notability because many refer to Coy's imminent visit to the town—this would reduce Coy to local interest. The Waterfront Journal article and the Music Connection article are the two significant sources that are free from any mention of any forthcoming visit—is this enough? I welcome comment from other editors about this. Goodvac (talk) 07:21, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep All told, the sources found count as notable.  D r e a m Focus  22:21, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:27, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: Not notable. Sources provided establish only limited local notability. Google searches did not turn up anything more substantial. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 11:17, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * How so? The sources I provided above are from major news outlets, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and NJ.com. This coverage is from opposite sides of the continent. How do these sources provide "only limited local notability?" The person has been recognized in major mass media publications in the United States. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:22, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The Seattle review starts out:
 * "At nineteen, Chase Coy shows a good deal of potential to one day become a top-notch singer-songwriter."
 * Which means that he is not yet notable enough to warrant his own article. Maybe some day, but not now, per WP:TOOSOON. Also, one sparrow does not a spring make. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 08:29, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: WP does not require that a singer should be a "top-notch singer"... otherwise we had less than a hundred of articles in that category. Cavarrone (talk) 13:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 09:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep Recently sources added say that he is notable. Thundersport (talk) 17:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ??? Only one source has been added since September, and that's a local newspaper supplement ("Hudson County Entertainment News"). I don't see anything in there that establishes notability. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 22:10, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep per the above sources provided by Northamerica1000 and Goodvac. Clearly passes GNG. Cavarrone (talk) 13:17, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note - I'm not quite sure it is understood what qualifies as a reliable source. The article contains three references:
 * The Seattle Pi reference originally comes from a blogger at Blogcritics, who will let basically anyone write for them . In all likelihood, not a reliable source.
 * The "interview" with something called Indie Rock Reviews is a prefabricated questionnaire. Also not a reliable source.
 * The NJ.com reference is a trivial mention in a local entertainment news website in order to plug an upcoming show.
 * This is yet another article about one of roughly five quintillion rising up-and-coming music sensations. It has garbage posing as references. Make it go away, please. --Bongwarrior (talk) 13:57, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete this WP:BLP as WP:TOOSOON. None of the sources provided by users Northamerica1000 or Goodvac rise to the level which meets WP:IRS, though some shirt-tail onto RS as pointed out by Bongwarrior immediately above. Based on a reasonable search for sources, subject meets no section of WP:MUSICBIO or even WP:GNG. All coverage is either local or blog-derived. Page creator has some connection to the subject, according to his Google+ circle, so this is likely WP:PROMOTION. Closer should take into account keep !voter new User:Thundersport has been blocked for ignoring deletion consensus on a promotional page. BusterD (talk) 15:51, 31 January 2012 (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.