Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Georg Immanuel Nagel


 * 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. CharlieEchoTango ( contact ) 01:24, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Georg Immanuel Nagel

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I can't find sufficient substantial RS coverage of this DJ/writer/philosopher/music producer/label-owner. Epeefleche (talk) 06:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * He is mostly known under his old pseudonym "George le Nagelaux". Nagelaux has released enough records on vinyl... --Ataraxis1492 (talk) 10:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Just search for "George le Nagelaux" on Google and you'll find enough sources (535.000 results). He is most popular among the German speaking countries, but his records are sold worldwide. Or check Nagel's entry in the database of the German National Library. The article exists since 2009 and Nagel is mostly relevant because of his musical works. I will adopt the article a bit...--Ataraxis1492 (talk) 16:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Help me -- unless I am doing the search incorrectly (quite possible) -- using that name I still can't find substantial RS coverage on gnews, or on gbooks. Am I missing some, and if so can you point me to two or three substantial RS coverage articles about him?  Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As I've said, he is important for his work in the music industry. The information about his writing is additional (delete if you want). What exactly are you looking for? He fulfills the criteria for musicians with his releases, cooperations with other renowned artists and gigs. - So, I've reworked the article to make it more definite. --Ataraxis1492 (talk) 12:14, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi. What I am looking for is indicia that he meets wp's notability criteria.  One way that he can do this is by substantial (non-trivial, non-passing) coverage in RSs.  That would meet GNG.  As to his releases, they do not suffice because he does not have two or more albums on a major label or on one of the more important indie labels (he has instead published them on the label he created, which does not appear to be one of the more important ones).


 * Cooperation with renowned artists is generally not in and of itself, without more, considered indicia of notability I believe. Gigs, similarly, are not -- unless they are RS-covered tours or the like that meet our notability criteria.


 * I recognize that he is 25; even if he fails to meet our notability criteria now, he may in the future. Inasmuch as you started the article, if it is not kept you might consider requesting to have it userfied, so that if/when he develops further indicia of notability you could re-create the article ... but to have it withstand future AfDs, I would suggest that the next time you create it you support the text with refs.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The criteria you quote is not obligatory, it is just a hint for relevancy. Every single case has to be checked individually and there is other criteria noted as well besides of this. I think that his cooperations with internationally known artists are highly notable. Together with his numerous gigs (even if mainly in the German speaking area) and his activity as host of several events etc. there is enough to consider him relevant. And of course I'de prefer userfying before deleting...--Ataraxis1492 (talk) 12:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I am referring to our notability guidelines for people generally, and for musicians, both of which there is no evidence of him meeting. I have no objection to the article being userfied as it is deleted from mainspace.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 11:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete - No coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. His importance is asserted in this discussion, but I can find no sources that verify that importance, and none have been offered in this AFD. -- Whpq (talk) 17:46, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ged  UK  15:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  22:04, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - no claims of notability, no in-depth coverage provided. Fails WP:GNG. Certainly doesn't pass the criteria of WP:NMUSIC currently. Sionk (talk) 22:10, 30 January 2012 (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.