Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veronica Ballestrini


 * 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. Insufficient independant sources to meet WP:MUSIC. No objection to recreation as and when the subject does become notable. Spartaz Humbug! 18:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Veronica Ballestrini

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable musician who doesn't meet anything close to WP:MUSIC. The article's creator has constantly removed any and all CSD and notability template tags in spite of several warnings. Has also contravened the WP:3RR rule several times. I've nominated this AFD for notability and also to stop an edit war occurring WebHamster 21:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This may be borderline but she is signed with a notable label and is on tour albeit a promotional one. However the article is sourced. Keep for now. --JodyByak, yak, yak 21:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Only one of the sources is independent, and I'm not sure how reliable Coquet Shack is. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?) 21:41, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Coquet-Shack is a completely independent web site. It has no affiliations with ANY music label or artist. It is regarded by the Country Music Industry as an honest (sometimes too honest) reviews web site. We can produce dozens of e-mails to prove that point. So, Ten Pound Hammer, beware impugning our reputation or face legal action against yourself and this web site. John D Lewis, for and on behalf of Dawn Lewis, owner, Coquet-Shack.com. (unsigned comment was added by Shackman (talk •contribs))
 * FYI - personal opinions when stated as opinions and clearly not stated as fact are not subject to libel laws regardless of the media they are published on. I gather the US is rather protective of its citizens' rights to free speech and doesn't look kindly on people who try to put that down with empty threats.--WebHamster 10:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * As to the Ballestrini entry: Hey, bin it. The we can all be absolutely certain that Wikipedia is just another MySpace, a quasi-user based site which is in fact, a publicity machine for the big labels who NEVER sign new artists before they've been tried out on smaller independent labels. And since a Wikipedia criterion for NOTABILITY is charting in a major national chart, we strongly suggest you check out Music Row's Country charts for the last six months. Ballestrina (an appalling artist with an appalling debut single,) meets that criterion. John D Lewis, for and on behalf of Dawn Lewis, owner, Coquet-Shack.com. {unsigned comment was added by Shackman (talk •contribs))
 * One single does not constitute notabiity. Suggest bringing the article back when notability is established per Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion and has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable. ♫ Cricket02 07:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Additional note: The one independent source/review provided,coquet-shack.com, albeit reliable, is trivial at best, and says: "If the single sells, her career will take off.", so it is not even known yet if the single will even sell.  Again, wait and see how this artist does, and bring back at a later time.  ♫ Cricket02 07:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * WHOA BOYS! Shackman DID sign the entries above: Shackman is JOHN D LEWIS.


 * ...and possibly another couple of user names too. See talk page for details. --WebHamster 16:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

And Cricket02 : You shopuld get your head round reality before mouthing off like that. NO-ONE can know, before a single is released for sale to the public, whether it WILL DEFINTELY sell well or not. Take Garth Brook's last single. One of the biggest names in Country music and it didn't even make the charts! It didn't sell well. Our comment on Ballestrini is neither trival, nor spurious. It is a genuinely held opinion of one of our reviewers, a guy who has been producing, recording and publishing Country music for more than 34 years. He's an industry expert and I'd say his opinion is anything BUT trivial. Now, tell us what the weather's going to be like tomorrow! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shackman (talk • contribs) 06:43, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
 * It will be either wet or dry, does that mean I have a career ahead of me if correct? --WebHamster 14:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I most certainly hope that she does do well and wish her every success. Until then, her notability is not yet established for inclusion in this encyclopedia per WP:BIO and WP:Music.  ♫ Cricket02 09:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The label itself is further down today's list for AFD, it doesn't have any notability either. WebHamster 22:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The label doesn't look notable to me - it was started last year. The tour is a radio tour - what's a radio tour, just interviews? No other sign of notability. MarkinBoston 22:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.--Hooperbloob 00:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Possible KEEP/Weak DELETE. I think that the article is possibly salvagable. An artist signed to a label with notable artists and having referenced, reliable independent sources, while not a household name, may be notable. BaldDee 12:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * [COMMENT to WebHamster, I think it's a little odd that you nominated both articles for deletion, then pointed to each other's nominations as evidence of the non-notability of the subject of the nom. I'm not questioning your motives, but it gives me pause to wonder... Why not simply state, "I nominated both articles for deletion because they were both non-notable." or something similar. If another editor had nominated one of the articles, your statement would carry slightly more weight as an argument. As is, in nom Y you're saying "See nom X" and in nom X you're saying "See nom Y"]BaldDee 12:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Because that was the way I chose to word it, you would have chosen your way, vive le difference. WebHamster 14:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment for perspective BaldDee has been shown to be a sockpuppet of a user who has been stalking me and making numerous bad faith AFDs against my articles--WebHamster 21:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, fails WP:MUSIC and no Reliable sources to boot. Her website isn't one. Seems like possible promotional here. I did speedy the article before. Jaranda wat's sup 14:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  14:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I think this is a good article, and will become more reliable with more sources soon. Veronica is climbing the Music Row chart. Keep for now, wait it out and you will see. 27 August 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.2.209.103 (talk • contribs) 03:07, 28 August 2007
 * unsigned comment was added by 75.2.209.103 (talk•contribs) (sole contributions have been to articles in question)
 * Comment for perspective: This anonymous user is actually the creator of the article under discussion. --WebHamster 14:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete. This artist has released one single, completely fails WP:Music with regards to notability.  One new user has created this article and the article for the label for the sole purpose of self-promotion/advertising.  (Special:Contributions/ChelseaBurns and Special:Contributions/75.2.209.103) and should refer to What Wikipedia is not.  ♫ Cricket02 03:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: The article is somehow contradictorious: it states Veronica Ballestrini is a songwriter, but then bases her notability in a song she didn't wrote. Wouldn't be logical to also show one of her own creations? But the article doesn't mention anything outside that single that she didn't even wrote, so, according to the article, a she's just a cover-singer... Sounds like autopromotion, sincerely. Apart from that, she is only 15/16 years old (born in 1991) and we've got a photo of her; that may be unsuitable (or maybe even illegal) in some countries without her parents' consent... --Neigel von Teighen 10:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * [COMMENT to Neigel von Teighen, Just because Veronica did not write that song, does NOT mean it is a cover. Almost all singers, sing songs that other songwriters wrote.--Bob1 11:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.2.209.103 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 29 August 2007
 * Strange though how a person trying to carve themselves a name as a singer/songwriter chooses to do so by not using her own material. I wonder if she was advised not to do so. If so I wonder why? --WebHamster 16:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * (Reply to Bob1) Yes, you're right. --Neigel von Teighen 13:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This is all completely irrelevant and childish to this discussion on whether this artist is notable for inclusion, based on guidelines alone, and not opinion, and should end here. ♫ Cricket02 16:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You should know that AfD discussions should be based on guidelines/policies more than opinions. Look at WP's Deletion policy. --Neigel von Teighen 10:16, 3 September 2007 (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.