Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kris McCaddon


 * 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 no consensus. Randykitty (talk) 11:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Kris McCaddon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject has been a member of several bands but not a prominent member. Fails WP:GNG and not sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article consisting of entries on which recordings the musician performed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:48, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 16:49, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 16:49, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete per nom - seems to pass NMUSIC #6 (multiple notable bands), but not NMUSIC #1 (actual RS coverage), which is a requirement to have a BLP. Some of what few sources are listed here don't even mention him. Note that you need to search under "Chris McCaddon" as well - there's a bit more under that name, but I'm still not dredging up the RSes. If we can turn up actual RSes about him, that'd tip it over to keep, I think - David Gerard (talk) 08:59, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:07, 9 October 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep, as David Gerald says (though contradicts it by voting 'Delete'), he meets WP:NMUSIC #6 having been a member of four notable bands, therefore meets current notability criteria. He's heavily featured in the Deseret news and Alberquerque Journal. Sionk (talk) 07:10, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:MUSIC satisfied by being a member of several notable bands, as there is no single redirect target, and McCaddon seems to have gotten some notice on his own. Also, this nomination is the latest in what appears to be a very long WP:HOUND campaign against the edits of Metalworker14 by the nominator. I recommend giving the guy a little space to breathe. Chubbles (talk) 12:50, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * That's completely wrong. No one writes about McCaddon in those bands and the music criteria are not stand-alone, they require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. That is not met just by being a musician in multiple bands. Ever. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * As for hounding, that's not true at all. I have an interest in the same genre as that editor and have multiple articles on my watchlist and when he makes additional poor edits to them, I attempt to correct them for the sake of the project. I don't want to give him space to breathe, I want him to stop treating the project like a blog and stop adding articles about non-notable subjects (like this one). Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If the music criteria weren't standalone there would be no point in having WP:NMUSIC. The idea behind it is, if a subject meets one of the criteria, it can be presumed they meet WP:GNG. Though I suppose there will always be exceptions. Considering McFaddon's been a member of four notable bands, two of them before online resources were widely available, it's difficult to believe he wouldn't meet WP:GNG. Sionk (talk) 17:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * And that's the mistake you're making. It's not a stand-alone, it expands GNG by giving possible ways that multiple sources may be discoverdd. Without the sources, you still have a non-notable subject. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You have to have at least one source that indicates that it actually meets WP:MUSIC; that's necessary for WP:V. But if meeting GNG were the only ultimate criterion, none of the subject-specific guidelines would exist. Ultimately, if the artist meets WP:MUSIC by some measure other than bullet 1, and this can be verified with an RS (say, a charting hit), that artist is notable even in the absence of a full complement of reviews or news articles. Besides that, for musicians in multiple notable bands, there's a simple, practical reason for not deleting the article; ordinarily, a non-notable member of a notable band would have his/her name redirected to the band. But it would be misleading for this musician to be redirected to only one of the bands he's known for playing in. At the least, a simple, telegraphic entry indicating the multiple noteworthy musical endeavors he has been involved in is sensible. Chubbles (talk) 15:23, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * But there are no RSes that discuss the subject. Sorry you don't get it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:11, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a biography of a living person. We absolutely need reliable sources that are actually directly about the subject. I see your point, but the RS requirement of BLP is really very strong - David Gerard (talk) 09:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 23:17, 30 October 2016 (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.