Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paddy Chambers


 * 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. ‑Scottywong | squeal _ 23:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Paddy Chambers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No individual notability established. Just a band member. Subject fails WP:MUSBIO. Egghead06 (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. What efforts have you made to find sources to establish notability, and what did you find? --Michig (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. WP:BURDEN applies. As this stands no editor has established notability. If you believe this passes WP:GNG the evidence is missing. Please add it.--Egghead06 (talk) 21:27, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:BEFORE. AfD nominations with no effort made beforehand to establish notability waste other editors' time. --Michig (talk) 21:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Your assertion that no search has been made is incorrect. I have and this subject fails GNG. As per WP:DISCUSSAFD, if you believe the subject merits an article please add the references you believe verify notability and the passing of WP:MUSBIO. Even reading the Guardian obit, it talks little about Chambers and mentions his membership of non notable groups. Please explain what he (the individual, not his groups) was actually notable for.--Egghead06 (talk) 05:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Here's what I found: In addition to the Guardian obit already cited in the article, I found Allmusic bio of Paddy, Klaus & Gibson, book confirming membership of Faron's Flamingos, book confirming membership of Paddy, Klaus & Gibson and The Big Three, book confirming membership of The Escorts, further book sources:, , , , , , . Also Liverpool Echo. Passes WP:NMUSIC criterion 6 as a member of three notable bands. --Michig (talk) 07:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC) Also a member of another probably notable band, The Eyes . --Michig (talk) 07:22, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. Nothing there to show he was a "reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles". These are just a series of name checks.  Like I said in the nomination, just a band member with no individual notability. As per WP:GNG -"significant coverage is more than a trivial mention" --Egghead06 (talk) 08:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The bands are notable - in what way do you feel being guitarist/singer in those bands does not constitute prominent membership? --Michig (talk) 09:10, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * How do the name checks you found constitute significant coverage or convey any degree of "Prominent" membership?--Egghead06 (talk) 09:18, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The "reasonably prominent member" part is there to exclude people who may have joined a band briefly or during a period when the band was not at its peak. When a band only had three or four full time members in it's entire history, all of those members are "reasonably prominent". We don't require significant coverage to "convey" prominence of such membership. --Michig (talk) 09:25, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * His membership of the Big Three lasted a whole 5 months and did not coincide with their only chart success (number 37). He is either not mentioned in the articles on the other bands or there is just no article on them at all! Your claim that we don't need significant coverage is wrong. We should always have it present.--Egghead06 (talk) 10:14, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Absence of articles on Wikipedia and/or deficiencies in those articles do not equate to a lack of notability, but I suspect you know this. He was a prominent member of The Eyes and Paddy, Klaus and Gibson, which received sufficient significant coverage to be notable (e.g., , , ), and the Guardian obit. is significant coverage of Chambers. If we had an article on Paddy, Klaus, and Gibson then a merge there may be appropriate but we don't yet. --Michig (talk) 10:31, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * So in summary, he was a member of several bands, which only existed for a short time, had zero hits. His contribution indicating notability within these bands amounts to a series of name checks and in the years of Wiki the notability of these so-called significant groups is so slight no one has been bothered to put together an article on them. The life of these bands was short. Straws are being clutched!--Egghead06 (talk) 11:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * In summary, he was a significant member of several bands, some of which are notable by Wikipedia standards and received significant coverage, and he was considered notable enough by a major national newspaper to publish a substantial obituary. We can verify all of this via reliable sources. These are policy and guideline-based arguments, yours are not. I suggest you stop wasting time here and go and improve the encyclopedia in some way, which is what I intend to do. --Michig (talk) 11:34, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * A series of name checks does not constitute significant coverage. HTH in your article development.--Egghead06 (talk) 11:41, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, § FreeRangeFrog croak 02:05, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

 Delete - Based on the information set forth in the article, does not appear to meet WP:MUSICBIO.--Rpclod (talk) 05:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC) Delete. There are no refs in this article. The ones User Michig has found and listed above appear to be trivial mentions, without a reliable and in depth source there is no place for this article. Szzuk (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 July 20.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 04:52, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep – The obituaries in The Guardian and in The Independent (Spencer, Leigh (4 October 2000). "Obituary: Paddy Chambers", The Independent [London (UK)], p. 6.) can be the basis for a reasonably policy-compliant article. Michig's sources provide some additional evidence of notability. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 03:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * To be more clear about what I was saying: the decision by these two newspapers to write full obits about this musician satisfies WP:MUSICBIO criterion #1, and Michig additionally provided a good argument about WP:MUSICBIO criterion #6.  Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 04:26, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  22:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete The refs do not appear to satisfy WP:BIO or the easier WP:MUSICBIO. Edison (talk) 02:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Efforts appreciated, but sadly it still fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSBIO.Forbidden User (talk) 07:45, 7 August 2014 (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.