Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Renald


 * 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 redirect to Sky (Canadian band). Randykitty (talk) 16:16, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

James Renald

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Inadequately sourced biography of a musician, who was notable primarily as a member of a band rather than as an individual. This has existed as a stable redirect to the band for a full decade, before getting spun out into a standalone biography within the last 24 hours -- but the biography makes no strong claim of independent notability outside the band context, and isn't referenced to particularly strong sources: other than one reliable source obituary upon his death, this is otherwise referenced entirely to a tweet, a simple directory list of performing credits with no substantive editorial content, and a primary source video clip on Vimeo. As always, a musician is not automatically notable enough for a Wikipedia article just because his work technically metaverifies its own existence on video streaming sites or because people have tweeted about him on social media -- the notability test is the degree to which media outlets have devoted their editorial resources to publishing content about him, but only one source here meets that standard and one source isn't enough all by itself. I'd be comfortable with restoring the original redirect, but that should be only after the edit history is deleted so that it can't turn into a revert war. Bearcat (talk) 23:13, 11 April 2019


 * I concur that as a stand alone article, this may need far more to become valid. But I must admit it contains some info not found in Sky (Canadian band). So what I would suggest is that Sky (Canadian band) has a section about its members, and this information here can be incorporated there in a separate subsection called James Renald. Similarly for Antoine Sicotte. Incidentally I used to follow the musical activities of this band based in Montreal and they were truly impressive in their peak of success. werldwayd (talk) 23:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I have not contributed to a talk page before, so hopefully I've done this correctly. While I still believe the James Renald page should stand on its own, I wouldn't entirely dispute moving his profile onto the Sky page -- even though a large portion of his career was spent outside Sky. If your recommendation is to do that, someone should handle a biography on Antoine who is familiar with his extensive work on Quebec television and as a chef. It may also be a consideration to incorporate a short biography on Anastasia into that page as well, and perhaps even consider removing Karl Wolf's page and adding him to Sky's profile as well? To me, this seems like a lot of fuss with some very shaky standards for who qualifies for the Sky page and who doesn't.


 * As far as I'm concerned, Renald's life stands on its own. Whether or not he's substantive enough to merit his own page is a matter of opinion. Outside of Canada, Sky might not seem like a big deal, but their debut album was considered one of the most popular Canadian albums of the late 1990s, had numerous hit singles, and is culturally familiar, even aside from Renald's other work. The lack of citation from other sources is simply because music coverage in Canada is pretty sparse with only a few active music journalists at major outlets. Renald's death was also reported on this blog, but I felt it was not accurate enough to be considered a substantial source: http://coolopolis.blogspot.com/2019/02/star-montreal-singer-songwriter-james.html. In the meantime, I've attempted to add a few more citations. Digitalkidd13 (talk)
 * Just to be clear, the difference between a person who gets their own article and a person who just gets redirected to their band doesn't have very much to do with what the article says — it hinges on how well the article references what it says. To stand alone, what he needs to have is a significant volume of reliable source media coverage that's specifically about him. It can't be Twitter tweets; it can't be directory listings; it can't be his own work on video-sharing sites; it can't be glancing namechecks of his existence in the context of being fundamentally about the band or somebody he collaborated with. To support his standalone notability as an individual, a source has to be real media coverage that is substantively and specifically about him, which is why the new sources you added still aren't cutting it at all: two just mention his name in the process of being about other people, and the third is covering the band, not him as a person. The obituary is still the only source you've added that's doing anything in terms of establishing that he's notable enough to have his own standalone biography separate from the band's article — but the obituary isn't doing enough all by itself, because making a person notable enough for his own encyclopedia article requires a lot more than just one notability-supporting source. Incidentally, you were right to discount the blog, but not for the reasons you stated: Blogspot blogs are never reliable or notability-supporting sources at all. Their admissibility doesn't hinge on whether you personally think they were accurate or not — blogs are always an automatic non-starter because blog. Bearcat (talk) 13:54, 12 April 2019 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, the problem with your argument, though it may be some kind of overarching standard that doesn't account for context, is that James Renald largely spent his career as a reclusive person, so a large portion of these media sources "about him" that you're looking for don't exist, simply because his anxiety prevented him from doing a large portion of interviews as a solo act, and actually made him shy away from credit. To me, this standard you're expecting doesn't account for the exceptional circumstances of his life, and his career was varied enough that lumping him into the Sky bio doesn't make sense to me. I'll continue to accumulate additional sources in the meantime and await future comments from others on this talk page. Digitalkidd13 (talk) 12:54, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * "Media sources about him don't exist" is not a reason why you get to use substandard sources to make a Wikipedia article happen — it's a reason why a Wikipedia article doesn't get to happen in the first place. There is no human being in history who is so critically important for Wikipedia to have an article about that they're exempted from having to have the correct kind of sources to properly support an article: if the correct kind of sources about him don't exist, that in and of itself is exactly the reason why he doesn't get to have his own standalone biographical article independently of the band. The quality of the sources you can show, namely their reliability and their depth, is what determines whether a musician qualifies for a standalone article or just a redirect to his band. Bearcat (talk) 17:42, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 23:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 23:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 23:13, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 02:25, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

As a person who knew James, this wikipedia page should not be deleted. All of this information is accurate. While I'm personally not sure how he would feel about this article, I feel that it is important for people to know him, his story, and how truly amazing and inspiring he was to so many people including myself. Do not take this wikipedia page down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.31.161.20 (talk) 05:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * We don't keep badly sourced articles just because somebody thinks the person was inspiring — if we did, then literally everybody who exists at all could put themselves into Wikipedia just by claiming that they had been (or wanted to become) inspiring to somebody. The inclusion test on Wikipedia always has been, still is, and will continue to be the depth of reliable source coverage the person has or has not received in media — getting this kept requires better sources, not just a rhapsody about how inspiring he was to you personally. Bearcat (talk) 13:08, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not saying that this article should be kept up due to the fact that he was inspiring to me or even others, I am saying that this article should be kept up because it is accurate. James Renald was an amazing musician who was in a well known successful band and was a successful solo musician as well. He deserves to have this wikipedia page. As I previously said, coming from someone who personally knew him, all of this information about him is completely accurate. This page should not be removed.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:03, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Sky (Canadian band) - as was the case until April 10. I suspect that Renald's biography was spun out into its own article to commemorate his recent death, but unfortunately he achieved little notability outside the band. He received some obituaries in major Canadian newspapers but even those described him as a member of the band. Also, the voter above must read WP:MEMORIAL, which says "Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others." ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 14:16, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:ENT WP:GNG WP:NOTPAPER  Lubbad85   (☎) 17:12, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * See WP:JUSTA -- that last vote requires some explanation of how the stated policies have been satisfied by the article. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 21:04, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ENT is not just automatically cleared by everybody who has ever existed as a music industry person, and GNG is not automatically cleared by the existence of a single obituary in the newspaper upon his death. GNG requires multiple sources about him, and ENT requires evidence of distinctions. Bearcat (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Sky (Canadian band). This unfortunately falls under WP:NOTMEMORIAL, which is policy. The subject can (and should) be covered adequately in one paragraph in the band article, which already cites the main RS cited here. So, redirect as an alternative to deletion, keeping the history in case someone wants to salvage some of this text to expand the Sky article. Bakazaka (talk) 22:01, 30 April 2019 (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.