Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin D. Skelton


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 15:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Kevin D. Skelton

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

This article has many problems: This article might be keepable if these issues are cleared up; I'm listing it here to try to get something done, since it's been stagnant for two years. —Bkell (talk) 10:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It is orphaned; no articles link to it.
 * It has weak sources. The first source apparently just describes his education, and the second seems to be a self-source.
 * It is a possible autobiography. The primary author is User:Voxaeterna; note that the article says, "He is artistic director of the musical collective Vox Æterna, which he founded in 1999". Several other edits were made anonymously by IP addresses in the range 87.65.xxx.xxx, which suggests they might all have been the same person. All remaining edits are tag-adding, category-adding, or bot edits.
 * There is no strong assertion of notability. This article reads like a resume; it lists Mr. Skelton's education, the various ensembles he has performed with, the various positions he has held, and a bit about his teaching, but I'm not sure I understand why he is especially notable. Looking through the list of notability criteria for musicians and ensembles, I see that a musician is notable if he "has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles"—Mr. Skelton might meet this one, perhaps.
 * There has been no significant work done on this article since 2007.
 * Being an orphan has nothing to do with valid deletion reasons. A salient indicator, perhaps, but nothing to worry about. After all, it can only be fixed through editing something else while the article remains unchanged. NVO (talk) 22:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You are right. I listed that fact because it suggests that Mr. Skelton is not notable enough to be mentioned or linked elsewhere in Wikipedia. It in itself is not reason for deletion, but it complements my other bullet points, which should be taken as a whole. —Bkell (talk) 16:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Seems to be a talented working musician and scholar. As such, it would not be surprising to find sufficient evidence to satisfy notability, but I do not see it so far. Perhaps others more informed about his specialty can search for additional sources and comment. Any reviews? Edison (talk) 01:20, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and expand/improve. And add autobiography tag for now. - Vartanza (talk) 12:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  — Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 03:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  — Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 03:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Firstly, being an orphan and possible autobiography and not having been worked on recently have no relevance to a deletion discussion. Including those in the nomination can only serve to distract from the real issues of notability and sources. There seem to be two claims of possible notability in the article. First that the subject has "had great success internationally in numerous festivals and competitions". For that to hold water we need to know which festivals and competitions - even his own web site doesn't list them, and I can find no reports of any such success from Google News archive searches for "Kevin D. Skelton" or "Kevin Skelton".. Only five of those hits mention this Kevin Skelton, and in no case is there even a sentence about him - they are simply mentions in cast lists. The other claim of notability is as a published scholar. He appears not to have held any position at an academic intitution, and, of the two published articles listed, one is known to Google Scholar, with just three citations listed. This is nowhere near the level of WP:PROF. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:57, 28 May 2009 (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.