Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darren Ross


 * 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  06:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Darren Ross

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable artist who doesn't seem to have any reliable third-party coverage that I can find. Neither Billboard nor AMG have any, which I consider to be the two most reliable sources. ArcAngel (talk) 11:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Darren has had news on PopJustice and has been friends with RedOne. Go on Google and find it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Croniclataus (talk • contribs) 11:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  — J04n(talk page) 13:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete — Does not seem to have the coverage by reliable sources required by WP:MUSICBIO. Article does not list references.  Web/news searches don't yield anything interesting after all the other persons of that name have been removed.  The author of the article claims that sources exist, but in spite of WP:BURDEN seems to think that we should find them ourselves.    Favonian (talk) 16:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

"Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels" since he has apparently released at least 2 albums with Sony, this qualifies. However, the article could really use a clean-up and some citations. Contains Mild Peril (talk) 17:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Though he doesn't seem to be particularly famous it appears he does meet criterion #5 of WP:MUSICBIO:
 * Do you have any evidence which could verify that he's actually signed with Sony. Whilst his blog says he was offered the opportunity to sign in late September, he is not listed on Sony's website. Having viewed some of his "music" videos at his YouTube page I'm thinking hoax. Guest9999 (talk) 19:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as far as I can tell this is some kind of bizarre hoax. Claims to have sold hundreds of thousands of records yet has an average of about 15 views for each of the videos in his YouTube channel. I did indeed do a google search for coverage at Popjustice (as suggested above) but could only find forum posts which detail an apparent campaign to get false information about this "artist" on to Wikipedia. Guest9999 (talk) 19:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

2009 (UTC)
 * Keep He is just an new artist to sony music label, you think sony would give all the details of world now, he always likes to stay quiet and surprise people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Croniclataus (talk • contribs) 21:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * So he's got two albums on Sony, but he's so newly signed that he's not listed by them? I don't buy it for a moment. Delete this chunk of self-promoting misinformation, delete the album articles, and open a sockpuppet investigation on User:Croniclataus re: User:Michelangelo24 for suspected block dodging per User:Grutness below. &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 19:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I can find no WP:RS which supports the claim that he's released two albums on Sony. Does not appear to meet WP:MUSICBIO.  Gongshow  Talk 22:37, 9 November


 * Keep Go on Amazon MP3 or iTunes and put Darren Ross and it will have the record label "Sony Music". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.235.74 (talk • contribs) 22:41, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: From the edit histories this IP would seem to be in a logged out state.  Favonian (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * To be fair the IP (whoever it is) is correct that some of the the artist;s iTunes listings (or at least this one) do list Sony BMG as being the copyright holder. I do not know how that information is entered into iTunes and frankly I'm yet to be convinced. Guest9999 (talk) 00:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * True, both iTunes and Amazon list Sony as this guy's record label/ publisher, but I don't know how that information gets there either, and I know iTunes and Amazon are not 100% reliable: I even suspect a possibility they might share (mis)information, since both mislabelled Vitas' songs Opera #1 and Opera #2 the wrong way around, which seems an unlikely (though not entirely incredible) coincidence. I note that the album article for Disco Man lists Cronic Records and Sony under "labels", and states "Darren has signed to Sony BMG record label and plans to stay with Cronic Records", but I can find no evidence of any association between Cronic Records (which does not appear to be notable) and Sony. If these articles are for real, perhaps some reliable sources will emerge after the forthcoming album release: my advice to the author would be wait till then and try again with suitable references should any become available. Contains Mild Peril (talk) 03:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. - gadfium  06:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:34, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that the page has been repeatedly recreated. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:34, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Copyright info on iTunes is not particularly reliable, nor convincing. It's is worth noting that the speedying of it in July was a little faulty - G4 doesn't apply since it had previously been speedied and prodded, but not deleted via a deletion discussion. Intriguingly, BTW, the person who created the page for the third time, in early July this year, was none other than User:Croniclataus. The creator of the previous version to that, in September 2008, was User:Michelangelo24, who was blocked for repeated (re)creation of inappropriate articles despite numerous final warnings - in early July this year. Croniclataus has also, from time to time, created articles at Darren ross, Darren Ross (singer), and Darren Ronald Ross, as well as the articles Michelangelo (producer) and Cronic lataus. In this latter deleted article, it says that Cronic lataus is a band whose members include (wait for it) "Michelangelo, mark ross, sally morgan. darren ross, nick james" (sic). Now, I like to assume good faith, and I'm certainly not happy to point fingers here, but the similarity of style and editing subject matter of Croniclataus and Michelangelo24, as indicated by their User talk histories, is intriguingly indicative, to say the least, as is the fact that Croniclataus started to create new articles with the earlier deleted Darren Ross article) at almost the same time Michelangelo24 was blocked (withing 48 hours, to be precise)... it's all circumstantial, but... Grutness...wha?  09:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability. Creator of the article has received multiple notifications for AfD and appears unwilling to follow accepted wiki practice. Anon user who has made multiple edits to this article looks like sockpuppet for preceding. (Talk Contribs) 10:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No proof that he's been on Sony label; no reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No proof that he's signed to Sony & Disco Man which has me believe it is a hoax.  delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ TALK  11:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - I am unable to find any reliable sources that substantiate the claims in this article. Robofish (talk) 01:13, 13 November 2009 (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.