Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riverhouse (Singer)


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 19:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Riverhouse (Singer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

I can't find significant coverage of this musician in multiple reliable sources. Contested prod. ... disco spinster   talk  04:01, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The references given are sites sponsored by Sistic, and it also gives the singers main website, http://ohriverhouse.com, as the very first reference.This website provides references for the biographical information of the singer, and hosts some reviews too.

If the singer's official website is stated, then surely that should count as one of the major verifiable references? If the page provides major biographical information, then that should definitely be used. Dontyoubetcha (talk) 04:12, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * — Dontyoubetcha (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Dru of Id (talk) 05:48, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I have found that the singer has a last.fm page, shown in reference no.3 on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riverhouse_(Singer). This reference verifies the statement shown before..all references look accurate to me..this page shouldn't be deleted. Editingonaweekend (talk) 08:31, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * — Editingonaweekend (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Do not remove this again. Dru of Id (talk) 13:18, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. No independent coverage found. Nothing indicates any sort of notability here. --Michig (talk) 08:54, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Someone's own official site is not taken as a reliable reference, especially when significance or notability is the question, Some are 100% OK, but in other cases they have been rather less so. In one, the only evidence for the existence of a 'multinational' was their website. Official sites are really only good for the External Links section. I don't regard last.fm as a reliable source as so far as I an aware the info is user supplied, like at AboutUs and LinkedIn. For the policy on reliable independent sources, see WP:RS. Peridon (talk) 18:28, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete If you take last.fm as reliable, this performer is 13. I would like to have evidence of the numerous sessions for the BBC and NME. Proper evidence from reliable sources. An article about this performer has been speedied twice as Riverhouse, In the version I deleted, the BBC were said to have compared his demo to a couple of notable acts, but that was tagged 'not in citation'. No mention of sessions, although in the last five days there might have been... I wish the subject luck - and an article when the time arrives. He may be up-and-coming, but Wikipedia is for the arrived (and the past it). Peridon (talk) 18:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:53, 16 April 2012 (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.