Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lightchild


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Lightchild

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No explanation in the article about why the subject is notable. No evidence given of passing WP:MUSICBIO criteria. The sources consist of the subject's own website, two interviews, and a trivial mention about being nominated for an award in sound editing. As such, it almost seems like a candidate for WP:A7 speedy deletion (no assertion of notability, no sources supporting notability). Finding sources may be difficult as the subject is known by three names: Lightchild, the stylized llghtchlld, and Mitsuko Alexandra Yabe. User:Skdb reviewed the draft and approved it for moving to main space, but it doesn't seem to be ready for main space. I wouldn't object to the article being draftified again instead of deleted. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:27, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. The GNG-qualifying sources that led me to move the draft to mainspace were:
 * For the first source, Fact (UK magazine) looks like a perfectly reliable music magazine; its article mentions that it was named "music website of the year" by The New Yorker in 2007. The article includes an extensive Q&A, but it's labeled as a feature and the questions the author asks were clearly tailored for Yabe; those kinds of feature interviews are very different than "this person was interviewed once as a subject expert for an article on something totally different". The second source was the cover story for a 2018 issue of CineMontage, the journal of the Motion Picture Editors Guild, authored by a New York University professor. It includes 650 words of profile before it even gets to the Q&A—that alone would be enough to count as WP:SIGCOV. The nominator's claim that this is nearly A7able is perplexing, given that A7 is a much lower standard than GNG that's supposed to be only for pages that lack any credible claim of significance. The fact that she was nominated for a Golden Reel Award alone is enough to dispatch that, even if it wasn't sourced. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 17:09, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not arguing about the reliability of the sources, just their independence from the topic. The Fact piece has zero coverage of the subject other than a mention in the intro, and a brief quotation in an interview of multiple people. This is not significant coverage, and constitutes a primary source, therefore not independent. CineMontage is published by the Motion Picture Editors Guild and the article is about one of their own members (or so it seems); hardly what I would consider independent. WP:GNG requires significant coverage that is independent of the subject. I'm just not seeing that the subject meets either WP:MUSICBIO or WP:CREATIVE. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:41, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure where you're getting "brief quotation"—there's a lot more than that, as indicated by the headline "How music editor Mitsuko Alexandra Yabe helped Boots Riley and Tune-Yards create the sonic world of Sorry To Bother You". It is an interview, but as I said above, one in which the interviewer has clearly done some background preparation; see WP:INTERVIEW. For CineMontage, it is plausible that Yabe might be a member of the guild (I can't find any confirmation), so it's not ideal, but I don't see any indication she has any ties to the article author, who as an NYU professor has some amount of authority.
 * Regarding WP:MUSICBIO, that's an alternative to GNG, not something required in addition to it, so either path is sufficient. But looking at those criteria, she meets #8, "Has won or been nominated for a major music award", with her nomination for a Golden Reel Award. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 18:22, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hm, I am not sure what I saw there. You are right, the interview in Fact is more extensive, although still an interview. Given that the award seems notable (and I missed the fact that a nomination qualifies, not being awarded the award), I'm withdrawing this. The article barely squeaks by. Thanks for your feedback. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Regarding WP:MUSICBIO, that's an alternative to GNG, not something required in addition to it, so either path is sufficient. But looking at those criteria, she meets #8, "Has won or been nominated for a major music award", with her nomination for a Golden Reel Award. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 18:22, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hm, I am not sure what I saw there. You are right, the interview in Fact is more extensive, although still an interview. Given that the award seems notable (and I missed the fact that a nomination qualifies, not being awarded the award), I'm withdrawing this. The article barely squeaks by. Thanks for your feedback. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2021 (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.