Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dylan Walker (musician)


 * 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. Favonian (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Dylan Walker (musician)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Seems to fail WP:NMUSICIAN, WP:GNG and WP:NTENNIS. The only remotely decent source cited is the Xttrawave Q&A, which does nothing to establish notability. No charting releases, no accolades, no significant influence within his genre. Tennis career seems to be junior level only.

WP:BEFORE search only came up with namesakes, even within the field of music. Claims of popularity don't seem correct. He has 5 subscribers on YouTube and only one song on Spotify has more than 1k plays. No sign that he is 'one of the most upcoming artists in the UK'. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennis-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Fails WP:NMUSICIAN + no claims for WP:GNG. Kolma8 (talk) 15:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Independent sources are missing for the article to meet WP: GNG. It also does not meet the SNG for musicians. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 15:37, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nom, fails WP:NMUSICIAN + WP:GNG. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete searches did not turn up enough sourcing to show it passes WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO.  Onel 5969  TT me 17:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:GNG. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 17:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Happy Sloth Records (Dylan's Mgmt)Interview with UK singer-songwriting sensation Dylan WalkerDylan Walker - Exclusive Interview — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.242.44 (talk) 28 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The two interviews are nearly identical and they don't do much to establish notability. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I suspect that this commenter, 81.159.242.44, is the same as TripleBald1 below, because they both made the same mistake of putting their comments at the top of the AfD and neglecting to sign them. Both errors were fixed by Spiderone and myself. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 14:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - Nobody has called him "one of the most upcoming artists in the UK" except himself (and reliable sources would use better grammar too). Happy Sloth Records is himself, especially since this so-called company refers to Mr. Walker by his first name in all its PR materials. Only visible in unreliable interviews (e.g. ) and his own social media. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 13:33, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't understand your point around Happy Sloth records. Decca records (and all others that I can see) call their artists by first name ] — Preceding unsigned comment added by TripleBald1 (talk • contribs) 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Just because Decca does it, that doesn't mean Happy Sloth should, and it's not even remotely relevant for Mr. Walker's notability. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 14:28, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I would argue it's down to the artist's individual preference. Island records don't refer to Lady Gaga as Mrs Germanotta as nobody knows her by that name. I suspect Dylan is known by his fans as Dylan Walker, not Mr Walker and therefore wishes to have his name displayed as the former.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TripleBald1 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Approve - Good notable links, active and verified socials and growing listeners on music streaming platforms — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kangaroodidapoo3 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)  — Kangaroodidapoo3 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   WP:SOCKSTRIKE  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Approve - Great up-and-coming Folk artist. Currently placed at position 13 on the Folk, Blues & Rock - The Ultimate Playlist - on Spotify. This page looks good to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Countrykid100 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)  — Countrykid100 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   WP:SOCKSTRIKE  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Approve - All looks and sounds professional and legitimate. Latest track on a few well followed playlists on Spotify too — Preceding unsigned comment added by TripleBald1 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)  — TripleBald1 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Approve - I disagree with the previous comments around legitimacy of the interviews and the comment that two interviews have similar answers. Of course interviews are going to have similar answers when promoting a specific subject such as a new song release. This page looks legitimate to me, and the YouTube Channel is an Official Artist Channel verified by YouTube themselves, thus again supporting notability and legitimacy of this artist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themusicguy70 (talk • contribs) 14:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC) — Themusicguy70 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  WP:SOCKSTRIKE  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Approve - notability isn't about how many likes or followers you have. I feel like that is a poor comment that's been raised and doesn't in anyway justify the page being deleted. There are many artists I listen to who are notable, legitimate and have wikipedia pages that don't even have a social media presence. This page and artist look notable and worthy to me. I also found the interviews to be insightful and legitimate too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pianomanplays (talk • contribs) 15:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)  — Pianomanplays (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   WP:SOCKSTRIKE  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Firstly, please only vote once in a deletion discussion. Secondly, you haven't shown even one example of coverage in a reputable source. Xttrawave is a blog that anyone can submit their music on. Same with Planet Singer. Same with Curious for Music. None of these are reliable, professional, published sources nor do they claim to be. Where is the newspaper and magazine coverage? Where is the coverage from major reputable online music publications (i.e. not blogs that anyone can submit their work on)? Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Approve - The grammar in the interviews in question looks good to me, and I'm not sure a writers grammar in an interview about an artist plays a part in the legitimacy and notability of that artist? This page deletion section seems to be a bit of a circus to me with a few people with too much time on their hands. Without mentioning names, get some fresh air. This page is very interesting to me and Wikipedia worthy - it has my approval — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itypethings (talk • contribs) 15:36, 28 March 2021 (UTC)  — Itypethings (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   WP:SOCKSTRIKE  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Approve - Just reading through the comments and someone has actually said "just because Decca does it, that doesn't mean Happy Sloth should". This has to be the most useless comment I've ever read on Wikipedia. What a terribly irrelevant point as to why a page should be deleted. From what I've read, this page has my vote of approval. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewikiman6 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)  — Thewikiman6 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   WP:SOCKSTRIKE  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Not nearly enough independent referencing for a WP: GNG pass and clearly does not pass WP:NMUSICIAN. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Approve - Strong independent referencing and interview links - a WP: GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN pass for sure — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinbobtwo (talk • contribs) 17:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC)  — Tinbobtwo (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   WP:SOCKSTRIKE  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment in addition to 's protecting the AfD, I have opened an SPI at Sockpuppet investigations/TripleBald1. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:52, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Like clockwork, the SPA's have returned once the PP is lifted. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed, and just as predictably, they've been blocked and the page once more protected. Favonian (talk) 15:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Fairly blatant promotional vanity article. The degree of sockpuppetry in above "approve" comments borders on the comical. ShelbyMarion (talk) 21:00, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete A7, G11. Most of the cited sources don't even validate the entirely mundane claims that are made.Pontificalibus 12:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete — Per G11. Furthermore, I too fail to see how the subject is notable and agree with the nom's rationale. The socking is as ludicrous as they come. Celestina007 (talk) 20:04, 1 April 2021 (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.