Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faye Webster


 * 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 keep. Yunshui 雲 水 07:56, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Faye Webster

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A handful secondary sources that are either espouse-like or cover very recent releases. Seems WP:TOOSOON for her on BLP based on multiple criteria in WP:SINGER. Comatmebro (talk) 03:40, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Coverage in Rolling Stone, NPR, Pitchfork (one article from them is a whole feature just on her), Vice, Consequence of Sound/Yahoo!, Paste, just to name a few. Also signed to a notable record label, Secretly Canadian. Passes WP:GNG by well over a mile with the coverage and being signed to label with an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andise1 (talk • contribs) 04:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:22, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:22, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:80%;color:#FA0"> CASSIOPEIA</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 04:22, 22 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: I know this singer-songwriter is still up-and-coming and it might seem WP:TOOSOON, but I think there's already enough sources to justify an article. In addition to the Pitchfork, Rolling Stone , Consequence of Sound and Paste articles  mentioned above, we have an AllMusic biography , and reviews of her new album in AllMusic , Consequence of Sound again , Exclaim! , and in the UK it's also been reviewed in this month's issues of Mojo and Uncut (and I'd put money on it being reviewed in the next Q magazine, too). Richard3120 (talk) 13:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Yeah, it may be TOOSOON in regards to genuine achievement, and the coverage is fairly run of the mill/promotional, but it's widespread enough among a number of quality publications/websites, cited above, that based on that alone it would be a "weak keep", but quality of the sources reviewing the newest album, plus being released by a notable, albeit small, label put it cleanly over the top. ShelbyMarion (talk) 14:18, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Typically I would err on the side of deletion but I think there can be room for improvement on this stub with more sources. Trillfendi (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.