Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lauren Béa


 * 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:52, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Lauren Béa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Currently fails WP:MUSICBIO, not enough sources as of now to establish notability. WP:TOOSOON PlotHelpful (talk) 10:35, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as has coverage in multiple christian music reliable sources as shown in the article, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 14:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - Considering the in-article sources: New Release is a weak-fail of Sig Cov; CCM is purely an interview so fails Sig Cov, PRWeb obviously isn't independent/reliable. The Christian Beat is a good pair of sources, but is from the same source. Given that, New Release, I think a WK is appropriate, but a neutral or WD might also suit as it currently is. Nosebagbear (talk) 22:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Based on poor coverage. Both keep votes above cite the quality of The Christian Beat as a reliable source, but the article from that source basically paraphrases content from the About section of the subject’s own website ( https://www.laurenbeamusic.com/about/) mixed in with standard new release information. I'm not saying it isn’t third party coverage, but it does appear to be lazy in establishing anything other than what this subject has to say about herself. Investigating the website further, it appears to be a self-described “up and coming” non-professional volunteer effort with the goal to become an important voice in covering the Christian music scene, but as of now it appears to be mostly a venue for passing off rephrased press releases as reporting and volunteer reviews. Has it been source reviewed yet? If I’m wrong, I’ll consider changing my i-vote. CCM magazine, on the other hand, is a good source, but this coverage—an interview—isn’t. Other sourcing problems are pointed out by Nosebagbear (talk) above. ShelbyMarion (talk) 20:56, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * hi, Christian Beat is included in this list of christian music reliable sources WikiProject Christian music/Sources, regatds Atlantic306 (talk) 19:06, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link. I see The Christian Beat was entered as a reliable source on 16 September 2015 without any evidence of having first—-or since—undergone a source review. (A word search in the reliable sources discussions confirm this.) I’m still sticking with my delete vote; while the site may contain reliable information, it also seems to be indiscriminate in what they publish, adhering to their mission (per their description: “… to point you to music…”) of promoting anything and everything Christian music related. Considering this particular reference essentially rephrases content from the subject's website, regardless of a third parties involvement to me it doesn’t come across as a significant example of notable coverage. ShelbyMarion (talk) 17:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 00:15, 9 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete The account that created this page (Lyvcreative) seems to have only been created to promote this individual. This page is her only contribution on Wiki and the individual is not notable. Based on the account edit history I believe this is just an individual self promotiong. I vote Strong Delete. Theweekndeditor (talk) 02:11, 9 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. Britishfinance (talk) 01:38, 17 February 2019 (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.