Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yoo Taeyang


 * 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 & redirect. czar 21:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Yoo Taeyang

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A case of WP:TOOSOON (to add: Individual members of SF9, with the exception of Kang_Chan-hee, are NOT notable enough to have their own articles as their activities are exclusively within the group SF9 and nowhere else.) Tibbydibby (talk) 17:01, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Alternative search terms:


 * Comment @ : WP:TOOSOON is not a policy-based reason for deletion, could the deletion rationale be expanded, please? Prima facie the article doesn't look like much, but a search for the Hangul 유태양 reveals a lot of hits. I do not speak Korean, what do all these search results reveal? — Sam Sailor 20:38, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 20:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 20:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 20:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Delete or redirect?
 * TOOSOON means not yet notable, an excellent reason for deletion. Not my field, but how can a "Pre-debut" performer possibly be already notable?  DGG ( talk ) 05:04, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably not, in which case a bold WP:BLANKANDREDIRECT per WP:ATD-R is a possible policy-based solution. — Sam Sailor 06:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment : I expanded a little bit for the SF9 members that I opened AfD discussion with, but these members are only members of SF9, nothing more. This is why they are being deleted. Tibbydibby (talk) 05:48, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I trust you do what is right based on the sources. Do consider if a categorized R from member to the band article SF9 per alternatives to deletion would be a useful search term. — Sam Sailor 06:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Rapid Delete Article cites no references. Only one result for all search tools at top, not a reliable sources. No reliable sources = no notability = delete. Tapered (talk) 08:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to band article SF9 as a categorized R from member. Subject's name is a plausible search term, redirects are cheap, and redirecting rather than deleting is a policy based alternative that is supported by WP:MUSICBIO: Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases. — Sam Sailor 03:58, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 19:41, 26 February 2017 (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.