Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendy Rule


 * 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. Withdrawing my own nomination Missvain (talk) 20:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Wendy Rule

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Despite my due diligence, I am struggling to see how this subject passes WP:GNG nor WP:NMUSIC.

All the sources I've found are either (1) non-mainstream sources or (2) passing mention mainly of appearances or concerts. I hope folks can prove me wrong, but, I'm struggling to see why this subject merits inclusion in Wikipedia at this time.

Thanks for assuming good faith with this nomination. Missvain (talk) 07:01, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Missvain (talk) 07:01, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Missvain (talk) 07:01, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Missvain (talk) 07:01, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment There are some sources here and here, but I have not looked at them. Subscriptions are required, although the second one gives you a few free looks.  On face value some of these look like they might be reasonable references.  Aoziwe (talk) 08:16, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, i'd probably lean keeping this as there does seem to be enough coverage of her dating back to the 90s. Much of it trivial, though some seems more significant (such as this full page from The Age in 1998 and this clipping where she is referred to as a "well-known Melbourne singer". Bungle (talk • contribs) 17:15, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Bungle - The piece from The Age is good, but, trivial coverage doesn't build towards WP:GNG. Maybe WP:BASIC, but, it would have to be a lot and not primary sources (i.e. concert promotions in a local newspaper unless it's a big feature). If you can present more sourcing, I'm all ears (or eyes..) Missvain (talk) 18:55, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I do take your point, but I am seeing what I believe to be sufficient coverage to justify some degree of notability. Some is relatively significant coverage. For instance, something more recent is this article from a 2008 edition and this article from a 2009 edition of Albuquerque Journal (New Mexico's largest newspaper). I don't know if you have a newspapers.com subscription, but I can see enough results on there alone, including the clippings I have taken and the mentions from Aoziwe above that suggest this person can pass WP:GNG, or definitely at least WP:BASIC, as you point out. Bungle (talk • contribs) 20:44, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Bungle - I'm actually embarrassed. I do have subscription at newspapers.com and for some stupid reason I did not even use it when I was reviewing her article. I apologize for you doing the grunt work and my amateur move at nominating this. It's been a week and I've had a head cold, so I'm blaming my cold medicine. I'm going to withdraw. Missvain (talk) 20:47, 23 December 2021 (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.