Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyls Burtland


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:05, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Kyls Burtland

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems to be insufficiently notable for a biographical article about a musician. The claims made are fairly minor and some of the references given are not even relevant or not even RS. The article seems to be trying (not necessarily in any bad faith) to inherit notability from other things with which she has some, but not a very significant, connection. Google News shows a few passing mentions but nothing that constitutes significant coverage by reliable sources. Maybe in a few years time this could change but for now it seems too soon for an article. DanielRigal (talk) 11:20, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 11:26, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 11:26, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: The author of the article has made a comment at User_talk:HeavenlyAntennas which probably counts as equivalent to a keep here. This includes a statement that the article is autobiographical. I have also advised them that they can comment here if they want to. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:36, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Almost certainly notable if the trajcetory is continued- at some point oin the future; but that time is not now. The WP:BEFORE that the OP mentioned does have  afew mentions, but the coverage so far lacks depth and persistence.  &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  15:29, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. A case of  Too Soon. Not enough notable mentions/sources.Dean Esmay (talk) 21:25, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Passess WP:MUSICBIO on at least two criteria: No. 1 and No. 8.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:26, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Criteria 8. Has won or been nominated for a major music award - Has been twice-nominated for the APRA Screen Music Awards, the largest Screen Music Awards in Australia run by Australasian Performing Right Association. Criteria 9. 'Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition'. Has twice won 'Songwriter of the Year' via Australia's National Song Competition run by the A.S.A - Includes multiple wins in multiple categories in 1998 and 2002, as well as 'Songwriter of the Year', the overall category. Criteria 10. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, etc. - Has composed and performed the main theme music and underscore for numerous multi-season Australian tv Series on Network tv, (some with a viewership over a million, high ratings for Australia) , some of these themes received nominations for 'Best Theme' including; Here Come the Habibs commissioned by Channel 9 Australia ; and Destination Scandinavia for SBS Network, nominated for Best Theme at the 2016 Asian Television Awards. Also passes Criteria 2. of 'Others' in WP:MUSICBIO. Has composed a number of notable melodies, tunes or standards used in a notable music genre, (that of film music) ie Has composed multiple recognisable theme songs (the key identifiable melody) for widely-watched network TV series as mentioned above. . - NB. the Article could definitely be better structured and edited. Author's notes and kind regards. HeavenlyAntennas
 * Keep Passess WP:MUSICBIO in criteria 8, 9 and 10. as follows.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Allowing early commenters to assess new sources.
 * Keep based on the addition information and references provided by I would have to concur that the article satisfies the criteria of WP:MUSICBIO. Dan arndt (talk) 07:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ansh 666 02:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep --Pediaorg (talk) 19:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Struck per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. North America1000 00:56, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep based on the analysis by HeavenlyAntennas. Meets WP:MUSICBIO. Laurdecl talk 00:58, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, I don't agree that they meet criteria #2 and #9 of WP:MUSIC, but User:HeavenlyAntennas is quite correct that they meet criteria #8 and #10. Lankiveil (speak to me) 06:32, 3 May 2017 (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.