Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Roberts (singer)


 * 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The result was   Withdrawn per improvement. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Dan Roberts (singer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Deprodded without rationale. Prod reason was "Found no proof of grammy nominations. Other awards are redlinked. Found no reliable sourcing to verify anything more than writing one hit." Sources added are all commercial in nature (MusicVF, CD Baby, Amazon) or are WP:PRIMARY.

As an aside, this was deprodded ELEVEN DAYS after the prod. There should be NO EXCUSE for a prod going that stale. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 12:41, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


 * perhaps it went stale, because it was unsupported by the reviewing admins? please note that the passage of time on a prod does not create a "right" to deletion. it means only that no admin has chosen to fulfil your request.


 * as regards the five sources, all of which you object to, & some of which i included specifically to confirm the subject's claim music-credits, where exactly do you suggest getting such information from? because if an amazon listing for an album, which MENTIONS THE AWARDS that it has won, or a list of songwriting credits at musicvf is not considered an adequate source for such information, then i'd really like to know what is?


 * Lx 121 (talk) 13:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:17, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:17, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Garth Brooks - The best source I can muster is this, so while it's verifiable he's worked with Brooks, it's about all he seems to be notable for. Everything else is your standard self-published and fansite fodder. The problem with Amazon is that they're in business to ship product, so the "Editorial reviews" tend to be promotional in nature, and unsuitable to use as a source. Oh, TPH, unless it's an copyvio, blatant spam, egregious violation of WP:BLP or similar (which this isn't), then nobody is required to "jump to it" and delete expired prods the minute the 7 days are up. Chill. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   11:32, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ok i understand what you are saying BUT i'm not talking about "reviews", notability, or any other "in-depth" content. ALL i'm talking about is the listing info:  album title (& the fact that the album exists), authors/artists (songwriters, performers, editors., etc.). song list, duration, cover art, publisher, date, awards, ISBN-or-equivalent, etc.


 * this is basic "directory/catalogue-listing" stuff, & a site like amazon NEEDS to get that right; it's part of their job. i'm not saying that they are always going to be "perfect", nobody is perfect; BUT the reliability of their listing info, on that level, HAS GOT to be as good as any other professional resource (& as good at error-correction). otherwise, they couldn't operate their business.


 * if we are seriously saying that an amazon listing (or equivalent) "is not good enough" as a source for basic information like that (examples given above), then there is something seriously wrong with how we are doing things here. because, i'm sorry, but that's just DUMB.


 * Lx 121 (talk) 16:04, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Keep. Found a just-ok book reference, and an RS magazine ref for his awards and life. Other sources are out there, just hard-ish for me to dig up at the moment because my HighBeam Research subscription expired. Also, PROD misapplied, since it's for noncontroversial, unlikely to be contested deletions. Also, "de-prodded without rationale", and all the complaints about the PROD, are not reasons for deletion. In fact, they are arguments to avoid. Thank you. --Lexein (talk) 10:16, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Keep. Need his age, city of birth, etc. The awards are impressive. Billy Hathorn (talk) 14:40, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * And where do you propose finding those? Pulling them out of your ass? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * What the fucking fuck, User:TenPoundHammer? --Lexein (talk) 19:52, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "It just needs his age and city of birth" is a stupid thing to say when we can barely scrape together enough to verify that he exists. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep It seems easy to find sources such as this account of the award of Entertainer of the Year by the Academy of Western Artists. It seems quite improper to PROD an artist of this stature. Warden (talk) 22:50, 1 September 2013 (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.