Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juice Wilson

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. Sam Walton (talk) 00:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Juice Wilson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very interesting individual but none of the material appears to be referenced. And while his travels appear interesting, his contribution to any significant tours, recordings or broadcasts are lacking. Thus fails WP:MUSIC Karst (talk) 14:47, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Author Keep. The article already lists an Allmusic entry as a reference, and Wilson also has entries in the Encyclopedia of Popular Music (4th edition, ed. Colin Larkin) and The New Grove Encyclopedia of Jazz (2nd edition, ed. Barry Kernfeld). The latter reference includes further reading from Chilton's Who's Who of Jazz and Fable Bulletin. If he's considered important enough to be listed in other encyclopedias, I see no reason why he shouldn't be included in this one. Chubbles (talk) 16:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. As it stands the article has one source, which is not sufficient. Also, crucially, the Allmusic entry lists a number of songs and not albums released by the artist. It certainly would be useful to include the above additional references, but what the article really needs is some indication of his notability? Has he been part of an important performance, involved in a record that charted or co-written a notable song? Check WP:MUSIC. Karst (talk) 11:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the touring and recording that Wilson did as a sideman that made him famous occurred in the 1920s and '30s, before there were albums. It makes sense that AMG would list only songs. Probably the most illustrious thing on this resume is recording with and touring Europe with Noble Sissle; he was part of an ensemble that was crucial to extending jazz's popularity on that continent. Ultimately, though, for a jazz musician, to be notable is to play (verifiably) with many other important musicians; it's what gets you into encyclopedias like those I have listed (which satisfy at minimum WP:MUSIC bullet 1, and/or the GNG). And the article gives sufficient indication of that, though of course I welcome attempts at expansion, and you give some areas where further work would be helpful. These are not, however, motivators for deletion, but rather for improvement. Chubbles (talk) 17:46, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I tend to see an authored Allmusic biography as sufficient, and in this case the subject has one by Eugene Chadbourne. As well as that and the above, the subject is described in "Essential Jazz Records: Volume 1: Ragtime to Swing" by "CF" (Charles Fox?) as "certainly one of the finest jazz soloists on that instrument" (the violin) [1]. AllyD (talk) 19:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. That would be a good reference to add, although it would be interesting to see what the author bases his opinion on?. Karst (talk) 11:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* Wikipedia:WikiProject Jazz notified. AllyD (talk) 08:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Chubbles and AllyD. Sufficient evidence of notability is present. --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:03, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.