Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mia Jang


 * 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.  Sandstein  06:51, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Mia Jang

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:MUSICBIO. New Age is not a national chart for purposes of this policy, and she meets none of the other criteria definitively. MSJapan (talk) 06:28, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * How is Billboard's New Age Music chart "not a national chart for purposes of this policy"? --Oakshade (talk) 01:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Because it's not listed in the hierarchy at WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS, and there's well over a hundred of them. Moreover, meeting the guidelines shouldn't be a struggle if notability truly is met. MSJapan (talk) 01:44, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:MUSICBIO only requires that an artist charted on a national record chart and it specifically identifies Billboard as an acceptable source as its an accepted reliable source.--Oakshade (talk) 02:15, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * See here. MSJapan (talk) 02:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * A quickly sought speculative opinion ("I am not convinced that Top New Age Albums is a national chart...") on a single talk page does not negate the primary determining criteria of notability even if a single user's opinion opposes that primary criteria. --Oakshade (talk) 02:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The simple fact of the matter is that there are 20+ charts listed in the hierarchy for determining notability in an if-then format, and this isn't one of them. Let's add to the fact that there is no coverage on the artist. If you're going to vote keep, vote keep, but I'm not going to withdraw the nom based on charting in a niche market below #10 with no other coverage of the artist.  As far as I know, she sold ten copies to hit that chart position. MSJapan (talk) 02:41, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. There is literally NO coverage of the article subject. I mean, I couldn't even find enough to verify the facts in the article. It is interesting to note that the bulk of the little information about the subject was added in this diff by User:Changhengning (notice this line: "Born in Taipei Taiwan (張恒寧 Chang Heng-Ning), her music education began at age three") COI editing? Now, coming back to charts, not every billboard chart is notable. The new age chart is a specialised chart and a number 16 on it may not really be very significant. Considering all these facts and the fact that there is hardly any information available, I will go with delete. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 15:24, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:50, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. For the purposes of WP:NMUSIC the New Age chart really does not count. KaisaL (talk) 15:34, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Uanfala (talk) 23:01, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. Uanfala (talk) 23:01, 7 July 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.