Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moe Rock


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 01:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Moe Rock

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Article's subject is a musician who has not released an album. He seems to meet WP:BAND only by having a single on a country's national music chart, as it is stated that his song "Baby June" reached position 97 in Ireland in 2010 and 1xx positions in New Zealand, Switzerland, and Sweden.

The interviews used as references seem to be self-promotion with conversation about politics in Iran coming secondary; from the content now in the article, this person is pushed as notable for his music and except for the unreferenced chart positions, I do not think he meets notability criteria.

By the way, what chart positions matter? Does having a single that makes spot 97 make one notable? What about over a hundred? Has a line been demarcated?  Blue Rasberry  01:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I also just nominated Baby June (Moe Rock song) for deletion.  Blue Rasberry  01:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your inquiry The page has met the required necessities for notability according to the Criteria for musicians and ensembles found at the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MUSIC —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metroparkoil (talk • contribs) 23:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete IRMA only lists top 50 singles at their site (including archives eg). Unless they publish a report showing top 100 I'd say the unsourced #97 is not good enough. I'd also say the unsourced outside to 100 also falls short. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk)
 * 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.