Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joshua Plague


 * 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. - Philippe 20:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Joshua Plague

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable. This person has been involved in everything from a band to vegan cooking, but doesn't seem to qualify under WP:N for any of them. There are several citations on the page, non of which meet WP:RS. SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable.-- RyRy5   talk  02:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Needs extensive editing for cruft and advert removal but seems to be a notable musician with a notable career. Reliable sourcing needs to be added to support this. - Dravecky (talk) 07:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to comment, I've done extensive Google searching and not found any reliable sources to back up the claims of notable musicianship. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: At this point, no way to make it past the bar -- as a regional/local journalist.  In his previous life, as a musician, a number of small independent acts.  They may or may not have had some influence, but they did not get significant sales.  The article reads like a vanity or homage page and fails NPOV.  Utgard Loki (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't see how any link fails WP:RS, or would qualify as "cruft". Anyways, he been involved several bands which have releases on notable indie labels, and is/was an important in the genesis of queercore. Just check out how many pages already link to this article—and I didn't create any of them (though I did fix redlinks that had pointed to Mukilteo Fairies, etc.) Furthermore, Plague and his bands meet the following WP:MUSIC criteria
 * #1 "has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable."(e.g.),
 * #5 "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels,"
 * #6 "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable,"
 * Finally, fully aware of WP:GOOGLE, I submit that a google search brings up close to 6,000 hits for Plague/Ploeg and his projects. A google books search finds 3 books, a quote from of which I've just added to the article. Certainly this article could be improved, but certainly Plague is notable enough for inclusion in WP. Yilloslime (t) 19:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * 1 - none of those sources are a) reliable or b) about Plague
 * 5 and #6 - Those may be true of Mukilteo Fairies, but they do not confer notability to Plague. The book quote is about MF, and the book doesn't even mention Plague/Ploeg. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The book mentions "the lead singer" of MK. All the sources are reliable. I contend that Plague, MK, and BTPNLSL are intimately related and best handled in one article rather than 3 separate articles. Therefore, if MK is notable, and MK is covered in the JP article, then that's an argument for inclusion of the JP article. But if you want to split out MK and BTPNLSL articles and delete JP, that might be a way forward, but I think WP is best served by having them all covered in the same article.Yilloslime (t) 20:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, fully aware of all the caveats in WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, I submit that—as troubled as it is—this article is in much better shape, both in terms of referencing and evidence of notability, than many (most even?) of the pages for other K records artist listed here. If the bar for inclusion is set so high as to exclude this article, then there are thousands more music articles that are going to need to go too. Yilloslime (t) 21:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: I don't know about 6,000 G-hits ... I get a measly 177 unique hits from a directed search of "Joshua Plague" minus Marvel Comics (to clear out an eponymous comic book character). There's not a reliable source in the lot, and the traditional red flag of non-notability arises: the lead two hits are the fellow's website and the Wikipedia article.   RGTraynor  20:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sometimes his first name is listed as Josh and other time as Joshua; sometimes his last as Plague and elswhere as Ploeg, and the entry also covers his band Mukilteo Faires, hence the "advanced" google search including all these terms. Excluding "marvel" reduces the count, slightly to 5250, so I think my point still stands. I don't see how the sources in the article aren't reliable, and even they weren't, AfD is about notability, not about how well the article is sourced. There are plenty of WP articles with no sources, and none of these have been AfDed. Yilloslime (t) 21:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The lack of reliable sources has already been addressed. As far as your take on AfD, I'm afraid you're very, very wrong.  Troll down the list for any given day at AfD, and you'll find several causes proffered for nomination, among them the non-existance of reliable sources ... something that trumps non-notability, come to that.   RGTraynor  19:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I was asked to comment here because I've previously edited this article. I edited it because Mr. Ploeg emailed the photo submission queue to submit and photo; in that same email, he also told us his birthdate with the intent of having that added to the article. Raul654 (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect/Merge (yeah, I'm fun that way.) I'm not seeing anything notable on him. However, Mukilteo Fairies are pretty plainly notable and article on them should be created.  Currently they redirect to Mr. Plague, but should be the other way around.  Above cites clearly make them notable.  Hobit (talk) 03:33, 6 April 2008 (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.