Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul The Trombonist


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Per convincing analysis of the claimed sources. Spartaz Humbug! 20:40, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Paul The Trombonist

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Subject fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:ANYBIO. Was removing quite a few unreliable sources but do not see any left that show notability. Also did a WP:BEFORE and unable to find significant coverage in anything reliable. CNMall41 (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CNMall41 (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Funny anecdote about voice recognition and him, but that's about all there is for coverage. Oaktree b (talk) 20:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject was featured on fox news as a notable musician Article feature in International Musician magazine as notable musician — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandpaper50673 (talk • contribs) 02:06, 4 July 2023 (UTC)  — Sandpaper50673 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:08, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Musician was member of Glenn Miller Orchestra a band of notability, performed with Arethra Franklin and then went on to launch solo career Interviewed on Forbes about this career  Playing trombone on a major national television broadcast. Capitol 4th Television Special  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlefish5021 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)  — Littlefish5021 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: To get this back on the log, note TK. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  02:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep based on info provided above, he meets WP:MUSICBIO. Criterion 6 is met for playing in Glenn Miller Orchestra. Criterion 12 is met for being on major TV news show. Possibly also he meets Criterion 4 for being on worldwide tours with Glenn Miller Orchestra.Hkkingg (talk) 08:26, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Following a discussion on User_talk:Joyous! and User_talk:Star_Mississippi, indicated their willingless for this to be reopened rather than a DRV kickback and fourteen days. I offered to be the relister for tech reasons. Courtesy  who contributed to that discussion. While I didn't see a consensus at the time of closing, I don't have an opinion at the moment as it's too late in the evening so this is a procedural relist.  Star   Mississippi  03:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I can see why this is a difficult one to evaluate. For WP:MUSICBIO, They've been on an international concert tour, and we have a single non-trivial sentence of independent coverage from a source that then quickly shifts into an interview. One of the first gigs Paul Nowell landed just out of Berklee College in 2007 was a world tour with the Glenn Miller Orchestra. As a reliable publication, stating it in their own editorial voice, we should treat that sentence as independent, but I can understand hesitation.  Also note that "trivial coverage" is defined in a few different ways, but not on this page for a biography, so but my personal go-to in this case is the definition tied to WP:BASIC. This is not close to a database entry, nor a mention in passing, so it is non-trivial.
 * I don't think WP:MUSICBIO is met, because the Fox clip seems to be a local broadcast, and the other clip doesn't feature the subject. I don't think WP:MUSICBIO is met, because one must be a "reasonably prominent" member of 2 notable ensembles, which would only pass for Glenn Miller, not Aretha. If people disagree on C4 above, then it is quite possibly a case of WP:TOOSOON. &mdash;siro&chi;o 04:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Assuming the source is reliable and accurate, he was part of an orchestra that toured, not the person who was on tour. If we considered C4 to include all members, then we could create a page for all members of the orchestra who received a sentence in a source saying they were part of the tour. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * First off, just want to be clear that I don't disagree with your request to reopen this, I think it's a borderline case at best. I'll explain my interpretation in depth. I am not trying to be argumentative, just clear.
 * If there were a source that had a sentence "A, B, C, D, E.... all went on a world tour", or worse, "The members of Glenn Miller Orchestra went on a world tour", I would consider that trivial by the policy of BASIC. If hypothetically each member of the orchestra had a separate news piece about them that individually confirmed that they did a world tour in a nontrivial one sentence statement as part of an article about them, then sure, they would all qualify. I'm guessing the reason the criteria landed here is that, in practice, that never happens. Not for jazz orchestras, not for classical orchestras, not even for the Polyphonic Spree. If it were to happen, then it would indeed be some special signifier of notability for each of the people who did that international tour.
 * I hope that helps explain my interpretation. &mdash;siro&chi;o 06:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It does clarify your position. However, I think you are interpreting the guideline wrong. The guideline would apply to the orchestra, not individual members. That's why we don't create pages for everyone in a band that has gone on tour. Even if it did, the guideline calls for "non-trivial" coverage which in this case I would say a single sentence in a single source about being part of an orchestra that toured would be "trivial." --CNMall41 (talk) 22:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete as currently written and sourced. There is really nothing here that works as a substantial source for an article. BD2412  T 01:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Here are some more citations that are not currently in the article: link1, link2 , link3 , link4 . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandpaper50673 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC)


 * — Sandpaper50673 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Star   Mississippi  13:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * 3 of the new sources provided by above commenter are valid and good. International Trombone Association Journal has deep coverage. Youtube video is from MSN and should count towards notability. Mashable article would count towards notability. Forbes unfortunately is not unacceptable per Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Naomijeans (talk) 17:32, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The MSN YouTube video is about as garbage a piece of journalism as journalism gets. Also, I note that both that video and the Mashable piece are about a "viral video" on the topic of texting while on the toilet, which is not currently mentioned in the subject's article at all. BD2412  T 16:56, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
 * MSN is garbage???? since when is one of the most reliable news organizations garbage? This is actually MSNBC and according to WP:RSP MSNBC is a reliable source. According to WP:BASIC "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability;" I have posted more sources below that are in depth. Naomijeans (talk) 03:21, 1 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep - There is enough coverage to meet WP:BASIC. Naomijeans (talk) 17:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you provide a list of the reliable sources you feel meet BASIC?--CNMall41 (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:BASIC says that "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability;" Some of the ones below are actually in depth
 * International Trombone Association Journal - in depth
 * internationalmusician.org 2nd article - in depth
 * projectrevolver.org/ - in depth
 * latfusa.com/ -in depth
 * Youtube video is from MSN - about a 30 second intro on him.
 * Mashable
 * dansr.com in depth Naomijeans (talk) 03:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe you and I disagree on the meaning of "in-depth" and "reliable source." Just a few examples here: WP:MASHABLE must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In this instance, the writer is a sports journalist writing about a musician which seems odd so I would not treat it as reliable. Dansr is a marketing platform so not sure how this would ever be notable since it exists to promote artists. Revolver does not show a byline for writer and it appears the site is open source (no editorial oversight) so it is also not reliable. The YouTube video is his video with an intro from MSN which is more routine coverage and not in-depth. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:53, 1 August 2023 (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.