Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ty Segall


 * 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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Ty Segall

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Not notable, either under WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Refs are not reliable, consisting of social media, deadlinks, and unreliable sources. Previous deleted three times. Declined and contested CSD. Contested deletion comments included that he was an "actual musician," "SOME amount of an entry is better than nothing," "rising popular act," and "the most efficient way to find all of Ty Segall's musical projects." GregJackP  Boomer!   16:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. The article could use some improvement, certainly, and the potential for doing so exists given the significant coverage available in multiple reliable sources, starting with these dozens of album reviews. The subject easily passes WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO.  Gongshow  Talk 19:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. This shouldn't have been speedy deletion material in the first place and the speedy was correctly declined. Arguments given by IP users who don't know Wikipedia rules are not grounds for deletion. The deletion history is similarly not grounds for deletion here. None of the previous deletions were AfDs and the final G4 deletion looks to have been improperly applied. Article has existed since December 2010 and has some references, albeit mostly poor ones. A cursory check of news sources shows there are many better sources though, especially for his newest album. I found numerous reviews, interviews and in-depth coverage in sources that should allow this to easily pass AfD. Off the bat, there's Chicago Tribune, Prefix, SF Weekly, Heave, Pitchfork, and Blare. There are also plenty more reliable sources that demonstrate notability, allowing this to pass both WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. I'll add some of these to the article. Gobōnobo  + c 18:42, 10 July 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.