Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Stickman

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Stickman

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Sources on page include a very very primary-source interview (archive), two very brief announcements of local concerts (one and two), some non-notable awards from a local paper (here), a brief album review from the same local paper (here), and several primaries and blatantly unreliable pages (One CD Baby link would be bad enough). Found no additional coverage of the artist or his albums; would recommend deleting all of those too. One of them is already up for an AfD, but I didn't see anything for the rest either. QuietHere (talk) 01:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, and Arizona. QuietHere (talk) 01:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Zero hits in Gnews (like none it thinks his name is a spelling mistake, suggesting other options), regular Google goes right to the various streaming sites, then peters off. Hardly on Google at all, which is the very end of the GNG non-notability needle. Oaktree b (talk) 02:18, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why this article is under attack now as it has been on Wiki for 15 years. This is a prominent Nashville singer-songwriter. Someone just needs to spend more time with the article. I can try and help. Colfax1 (talk) 18:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I added links to the direct articles from Nashville Scene, Daily Sun etc. Colfax1 (talk) 20:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Colfax1 this is not an article "under attack" as you put it. This is a normal process of Wikipedia. The AfD process is all about determing whether an article should exist or not. In this case, the concern is that there isn't enough coverage in the article. Some articles simply do not prove notability of their subject. Sometimes that just means more coverage exists which would prove it, but said coverage hasn't been added yet and is needed. Other times it means the subject simply isn't notable enough to get an article and said article either gets deleted or redirected to a more notable page which discusses the subject in as much detail as is reasonable. What you need to do, seeing as you believe this artist to be prominent and the article worth saving, is find more coverage than what is on the page already that can be added which would prove your claim. The problem is that I and Oaktree have both already done so and neither of us found anything of the sort, meaning the likelihood of that coverage existing is drastically reduced. But maybe you know of sources that we don't which would have that coverage. If so, look in those places and add what you find. Who knows, maybe the material is out there and we both just didn't see it. I've seen it happen before and it wouldn't surprise me here. I have my doubts, but it's not impossible. And for what it's worth, do keep in mind that just expanding the article based on what's already in it will not save the article, nor will whatever it is you did with those links which looks like it probably just broke existing Wikilinks rather than actually solving anything.

And for everyone else's sake, it should also be noted that I've left a warning on Colfax1's talk page about their multiple removals of the AfD template from the article. If this happens a third time, please report it. It's blatantly against the rules; the template itself says not to remove it quite clearly. QuietHere (talk) 20:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There have been some attempts to improve the article, but Mr. Stickman simply has simply not been noticed by the music media in a significant and reliable way. He has appeared briefly in a few semi-reliable sources, but that does not mean anything significant was said that can inform an encyclopedic article. Softball intro interviews and gig announcements don't count. He's been around for a long time and I hope he has been able to make a living with what he loves, but he doesn't qualify for an article here. Also, there are nine articles for albums that were equally unnoticed by the press, and those can be boldly redirected to Stickman's article in the event that he survives this process. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: A different editor has redirected most of the albums as I suggested, with the exception of the one being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tunnel Vision (Stickman album). ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A WP:MILL article that fails WP:NMUSICIAN, along with Tunnel Vision which is fails WP:NALBUM. Once the articles are deleted, these redirects such as Transition (Nathan Stickman album), Futurelook, Acoustic Empathy, Walking with a Smile, Just Passing Through,Trial and Error (album) and Pocket of Clouds to Nathan Stickman could be eligible for WP:G8. 2600:1700:9BF3:220:A511:6CC1:2D54:9C6B (talk) 19:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's the plan. QuietHere (talk) 23:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:06, 27 January 2023 (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.