Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rene Clausen


 * 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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 16:08, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Rene Clausen
I don't think Clausen is all that notable. Also, the creator of this article has repeatedly removed the notability tags I have inserted without expanding the article or demonstrating that Clausen is notable. Matth e w UND (talk) 01:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep and Move to René Clausen Google and Yahoo provide many results asserting his notability, such as this or this. -- Hús  ö  nd  01:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Husond - Richfife 01:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Article's author was given numerous opportunities to verify claims of notability, but chose not to, instead getting into an endless revert war (basically adding a "Special note" that the subject is notable in itself so no proof needs to be provided). This seems indicative that the author cannot prove claims. Wavy G 02:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I believe that the article should not be punished for its creator's misconduct.-- Hús  ö  nd  02:15, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * True. All I meant was the author's actions seem to indicate that he/she is unable to provide a reason to keep, but wants to keep the article despite this. Wavy G 02:38, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Could be. But for what I found I believe that the author just didn't want to bother. If this person's notability is asserted, then there's no need to delete an article that someone else is likely to create.-- Hús  ö  nd  02:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. Also, if the subject is a notable composer, how come no compositions are listed?  Anyone can make arrangements - I would expect any music teacher to do that - but that should not be a qualification for putting every music teacher in an encyclopaedia.   Emeraude 12:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment I would like to call to your attention that René Clause clearly meets WP:MUSIC, a Google search clearly confirms that. Please do not be tempted to delete the article just because its creator didn't do a good work with it. Expand instead.-- Hús  ö  nd  15:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as nn music teacher; clearly fails WP:BIO. Eusebeus 15:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep A valid music composer, as Husond says. -- P.B. Pilh  e  t  /  Talk  16:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep This book (Strimple, Nick (2005). Choral Music in the Twentieth Century. Amadeus Press.  p.261. ISBN 1574671227) says, "Prominent educational composers at century's end included ... Rene Clausen (b.1953), who mastered a lush impressionistic style...."  Also, an Amazon search found 20 discs containing his compositions, 11 of which are currently available, 2 of which are kept in stock at Amazon.  Those are facts I can quickly produce.  BTW, I know of him only as a composer, whose music I've performed on a number of occasions.  The fact he's possibly a non-notable educator is irrelevant. I'm no expert, and won't think of including my opinion in the article, but I believe he is unquestionably a notable 20th century sacred choral music composer.  I'm confident that a little more digging could document this better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quintote (talk • contribs) 15:09, 11 October 2006
 * Keep per Quintote. Vectro 17:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Husond and Quintote. - Lex 17:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Passes WP:MUSIC, notable composer. Torinir ( Ding my phone  My support calls   E-Support Options  ) 18:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable composer. Keep and expand. Sr13 05:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and develop.


 * 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.