Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DJ Quicksilver (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 SNOW keep.  The prior AfD closer agreed on ANI that the subject is notable, sourcing concerns have been addressed. Jclemens (talk) 22:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

DJ Quicksilver
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I can find no non-trivial mentions of "DJ Quicksilver" through Gnews. There are 66 total Gnews hits for him, and all seem pretty trivial. And the current list of sources is ittle more than a milieu of Myspace, Last.fm, and similar "sources" that are not reliable. Until such sources are found (I tried, and couldn't find any), this should be deleted. Unit Anode  01:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The previous AFD showed a clear consensus for keeping, despite the way it was closed, and the article has reliable sources for his hit singles, including two top-10 hits in the UK, and adequate demonstration of coverage.--Michig (talk) 09:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * also note that MySpace has never been used as a source in this article as far as I can see.--Michig (talk) 11:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep and Close Starting a new AfD five days after the first AfD closed? The admin that closed the first AfD on 1 February clearly stated, "Subsequently restored after editor offered to source it. Do not delete if this promise is met." The promise was met and the article is sourced. Warrah (talk) 14:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The first AFD was closed as "delete" and you know it. It was only restored after promises that the article would be reliably-sourced. This has not been done. Last.fm is not a reliable source. And none of the current sources provide anything other than trivial mentions of this guy. Unit  Anode  16:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep UK top 10 singles = definitely notable. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep First, the article is now sourced as promised in the first AfD. Second, once it's sourced we can see if it meets some of the notability guidelines: one of the sources (The Complete Book of the British Charts) says that it had two singles charting among the top ten in a UK chart, so it meets well at least one point of WP:MUSICBIO, specifically "#2 Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.". He also had other singles listed in other charts: UK #12, Germany #56, Germany #34, Austria #33, Switzerland #99, and also an album in UK #26. --Enric Naval (talk) 14:23, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep As per Eric, article is sufficiently well sourced now and a notable musician. Off2riorob (talk) 15:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as per my statement in the original AfD (which was along the lines of him being notable, having made the British Top 10 twice) - even more so that everything in there is sourced. (As for lack of results in Gnews - there would be: most of his success came when the Internet was the domain of ultrageeks. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) &#124; (talk to me) &#124; (What I've done)  16:15, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Enric Naval and DitzyNizzy. Hit singles confer notability. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2010 (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.