Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marvin Eugene Smith


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:00, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Marvin Eugene Smith

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

There does seem to be some notability of this subject. Having wrote "hit singles" for RCA and being nominated for a Grammy Award, I believe that might satisfy WP:CREATIVE and/or WP:ENTERTAINER. However, the article does not cite reliable sourcing to verify any of that information, and I can't find any sourcing to help verify claims. Akerans (talk) 19:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment He does appear on page 89 of Chicago Soul (1992) by Robert Pruter, and he is mentioned in passing in a couple of magazine articles, such as the one in Living Blues, Google Books search. I suspect that given the rather loose notability requirements for musicians, that that is more than many of them have.  He is not to be confused with the WWII hero or the Harlam photographer of the same name. --Bejnar (talk) 05:30, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: I don't understand why this wouldn't just be deleted via a BLP-PROD. The one "reference" isn't a reliable source, as it's to a commercial site of which subject is involved (I assume, I can't load up such a graphics heavy site at the moment).  As such, this is an unreferenced BLP, and should be deleted until such time as we can reliably verify it's contents.  Qwyrxian (talk) 05:34, 4 October 2010 (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.