Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolf Mail


 * 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 no consensus to delete, default to keep.  Jclemens (talk) 03:28, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Wolf Mail

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable musician. No charted hits. No significant news coverage. External links only to blog sites or his own website. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Oddly enough, there seems to be some coverage in Australian newspapers, such as the Central Coast Express  and the Canberra Times . According to The Spokesman-Review, he is "nationally revered".  I would lean towards keep .  Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 04:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The "nationally revered" remark appeared in an appearance announcement, and was doubtless written by a PR rep. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 09:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair point. Downgrade my recommendation to weak keep. As an aside, how successful would a musician have to be to hire a PR rep? Wouldn't they usually have had some press coverage already? ;) Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 21:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  22:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  22:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.