Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joshua Bartholomew (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Although there's merit to QuietHere's merger comment, it doesn't appear that consensus is going to form at this time. This does not preclude a future discussion as to whether it makes sense to cover Bartholomew within the work for which he's primarily notable. Star  Mississippi  01:40, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Joshua Bartholomew
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Does not appear to be notable beyond his writing credit on "Everything Is Awesome". The rest of the coverage in the article is either from sources I wouldn't guarantee to be reliable (such as a non-notable local paper from Alliston, Ontario), isn't actually about him (such as the Deadline article on the cancelled TV pilot that doesn't mention his name at all), or is just blatantly unreliable like Ron Sexsmith's own website. Several sources are dead though findable through the Web Archive but even all those didn't add much promise to this article, and I couldn't find any additional coverage either. QuietHere (talk) 09:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. QuietHere (talk) 09:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * See also the AfDs on the duo he's in and the other half of that duo. QuietHere (talk) 10:04, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:18, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:COMPOSER#1, he has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition, and there is significant coverage that includes biographical and career information, (including JoLi), e.g. Canadian songwriter Joshua Bartholomew’s ‘Lego’ tune earns Oscar, Grammy nods (Toronto Star), brief coverage (CBC), and there is brief coverage of his co-writing with Lisa Harriton and Kenny Loggins (Broadway World) (San Diego Tribune). Beccaynr (talk) 01:02, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Weak keep I think he just meets GNG, there's also this non-trivial piece by the Canadian Press in the Toronto Star about his Grammy nomination. Oaktree b (talk) 23:09, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I think the Toronto Star piece above pushes it over the edge. Nfitz (talk) 23:56, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge with Everything is Awesome. This is a WP:BLP with a lot of unsourced personal information, as well as information sourced to a promotional packet from the artist's website that's no longer online, information sourced to an internet forum that is no longer online (and not archived), and a whole lot of coverage of Everything is Awesome which mentions the artist in passing or not at all. I think nearly all the personal info needs to be removed for failing WP:BLP (it's probably accurate, but not verifiable). The creator and primary author of this page, User:Halle Leah, may have a COI—almost all of their edits have been on topics related to this artist, his partner, and their collaborative moniker specifically (as well as a couple other musicians); I suspect there's UPE here and that this page was created by a publicist (the original AfD here appears to have been closed with the conversation mostly centering around WP:BITE instead of the actual notability of the page). Notability seems borderline; he's definitely significantly covered in reliable independent sources, but only two of them, both about the same event. Per WP:COMPOSER, Where possible, composers or lyricists with insufficient verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article should be merged into the article about their work. Dylnuge  (Talk • Edits) 01:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to scrape in, thanks to the Toronto Star coverage. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't be surprised if this closes as keep given the number of votes, but I'd like to clearly state my support for Dylnuge's merge option. The Toronto Star piece is an interview which is always hazy (see WP:INTERVIEW), and most of the material in it is regarding Everything is Awesome anyway so it'd be more useful for that page. The CBC piece that Beccaynr linked would be more useful to this page, but it's also awkward because of being interview-based writing. I just think the merge would be safer, and it would preserve what good material there is while dumping the unverifiable/primary-sourced parts which need chopped off anyway. QuietHere (talk) 09:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Per WP:BASIC, Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject. However, when there is secondary context or commentary in addition to an interview, this can be used to support notability for a BLP. And there does not appear to be a place to put a biography of this subject in the Everything is Awesome article that would be WP:DUE, because there appears to be sufficient verifiable career information per WP:COMPOSER, unrelated to the song. Beccaynr (talk) 14:17, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I generally agree with this read (though I disagree on the ultimate action to take, I don't disagree with anyone else's policy-based arguments for keeping the article; notability is maybe debatable here but I don't think it's a clear fail, and no one is using the primary sources to argue notability). I'll just add that there are some more stringent guidelines on primary sourcing BLP info, specifically WP:BLPSELFPUB, where it stipulates the article is not based primarily on such sources. Honestly I think this one is borderline and it's probably fine to keep it around, but uncited and poorly sourced BLP stuff always gives me a bit of pause. Dylnuge  (Talk • Edits) 19:31, 7 November 2022 (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.