Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NŌVA


 * 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. Missvain (talk) 21:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

NŌVA

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable singer/songwriter. Google returns nothing useful (strings: "nova rose", "nova rose" singer), with most hits being to social media or non-responsive. —A little blue Bori v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 23:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:18, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:18, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:18, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. The strongest notability claim here is a completely unsourced claim that a song went to #1 in "the correspondant radio charts", failing to clarify what "the correspondant radio charts" is or whether it's IFPI-certified. We're looking for Billboard, not just any random chart whose existence you assert but fail to verify. Nothing else stated here passes any NMUSIC criterion at all, and the sole footnote is a Q&A interview in which she's talking about herself in the first person on a non-notable and unreliable blog, which is not a notability-supporting source. We are not a free public relations platform on which emerging musicians are entitled to have articles for the publicity — making it comes first and then the Wikipedia article follows, not vice versa. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. Bearcat, the claim of her reaching number one on the radio charts can be verified from this. Nonetheless, all sources that I could find are either interviews with subject that does not include any commentary from the interviewer which makes it neither secondary nor independent, or are questionable with little evidence of editorial oversight: 1 and 2 (except I guess this). I don't think these can be used to demonstrate notability. -- Ashley yoursmile!  04:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I am certain regional charts don't count as far as notability is concerned. The article linked explicitly says "#1 spot on Quebec radio stations" (emphasis added). Also see WP:CHARTS, which emphasises nat'l charts overall. —A little blue Bori  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 06:26, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , as someone who works with music articles rigorously I'm well aware of what WP:CHARTS states. I just mentioned that the claim of the subject topping the radio chart as mentioned in the article is verifiable. Ashley  yoursmile!  08:59, 7 May 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.