Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Mitchell


 * 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. Additionally, note that while the first comment by IP 24.228.254.55 wasn't denoted in bold with "keep", "comment", etc., it is essentially a keep !vote in nature, is guideline-based, and contributes to the overall consensus here. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica1000 22:29, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Tyler Mitchell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. I think that this article fails the WP:GNG criteria as well as the musician-specific notability guidelines. He's been one of many members of a notable group, which does not make him notable himself. The only real notability argument here is that he inherits some notability from his father, but notability is not inherited in this case. Ducknish (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Procedural note. This article was AfD-tagged on the talk page; I have moved the tag and reworked the original nomination page, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Tyler Mitchell, to this page. —C.Fred (talk) 02:11, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:18, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:18, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. I would point out that the majority of sources cited here seem to only prove the existence of the artist and albums and not any notability thereof. Ducknish (talk) 02:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

The guidelines seem to ask for the fact that supported sources be noted to denote coverage of the artist in question are provided by credible third party sources - the subject was given an editors pick in Downbeat magazine for his first CD as a Leader and the CD is on a highly respected NY label. He has received a Grammy nomination for his work - you are not going by the guidelines which ask for common sense to be used I feel - i can provide multiple pages on wikipedia that dont match the music noteriety standard you are asking for - again, you are not being objective in your reading of the guidelines i feel - which provide for artists like this one - you might not understand the importance of playing with Rashied Ali as well as more traditional artists - this is unfortunate if so. 24.228.254.55 (talk) 08:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Follow up: I have tried to read the guidelines. This says: General notability guideline Shortcuts: WP:GNG WP:SIGCOV If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. In my opinion, A review in Downbeat magazine (The Leading Jazz magazine) for Mr Mitchell's own CD (an editor's pick no less), reviews in JazzTimes, The Chicago Reader (sources viewable here: http://www.tylermitchelljazz.com/contact.html) would be "significant coverage" "in (a) reliable sources" plus articles and interviews in AllAboutJazz (as referenced) 24.228.254.55 (talk) 02:51, 18 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep and improve. While a lot of the sources cited in the article don't directly cover Mitchell, the All About Jazz interview gives him a lot of column-inches, and the DownBeat review, while short, shows attention. I think the best fate for this article right now is to keep it and work on improving it. If, in three to six months, the article hasn't improved, then I'd say a second AfD is in order. However, I think the article needs some time to develop (which it hadn't had before the AfD tag went up), and I think that enough claims of notability are made that the development can take place in the main article space. —C.Fred (talk) 13:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil (speak to me) 07:03, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Comment. I will gladly add more to this page - as there are more reviews and articles on Mr Mitchell - but I also think that the guidelines allow for artists such as Mr Mitchell who are 'unique' - in that they play in diverse (and often quite separate) aspects of american improvised music. Sometimes this topic isn't a subject of Jazz writing and criticism due to it's more obscure nature - but in reading the guidelines, they stress common sense and exceptions to a strict reading of what is "notable" be sometimes employed by editors. Given some time, the article will generally improve - but I have been spending most of my effort fending off deletion notices so unfort I havent had the time to actually improve the article itself - but this also leads me to a bit of a loss, if the wikipedia does not recognize a musician performing on Grammy nominated recordings as a level of notoriety (the top recognition given by the recording industry at present - in conjunction with press as listed in the article), what does it use to establish this standard? 24.228.254.55 (talk) 04:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔  04:39, 29 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep and improve The Grammy nomination gets him through WP:MUSIC. GoldenRing (talk) 12:25, 29 April 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.