Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graham Dalby (2nd nomination)
- 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. Consensus has shifted strongly to "keep," and sources provided by "keep" !voters have not been rebutted. (non-admin closure) Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:01, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Graham Dalby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Still no evidence he meets WP:MUSICBIO yet. In a WP:BEFORE search the only secondary coverage I could find of him was this article in the local weekly Kent Messenger. Couldn't find any RS that he'd written for, sung for or appeared in anything on the BBC, just fragments on social media, Soundcloud, etc. Editors hunting for coverage, please note there's an unrelated jockey with the same name, so you might want to exclude the word "jockey" on a search. Wikishovel (talk) 09:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Hong Kong, and England. Wikishovel (talk) 09:44, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete: no indication of notability, fails WP:MUSICBIO.Anktjha (talk) 10:48, 28 January 2025 (UTC) sock Girth Summit (blether) 12:30, 30 January 2025 (UTC)- Delete Once again, no sources and nothing online to show he meets WP:GNG. Junbeesh (talk) 11:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment There is quite a lot of coverage in digitised British newspapers. I'm pretty sure he will meet WP:GNG and/or WP:MUSICBIO. I'll add some sources. We really need the British Newspaper Archive in the Wikipedia Library so other editors can find the sources there too! RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- I definitely support making the British Newspaper Archive accessible, would be very helpful. Starklinson (talk) 06:15, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Leave Graham Dalby the way as it is, it will eventually meet WP:MUSICBIO. I will add sources to it. It was under construction, don't take it down. Mrtoadtv (talk) 14:55, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: Likely more coverage in older newspapers, there's this [1], not a great reveiw, but it counts. Oaktree b (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment There's also a short staff bio on Allmusic referenced in the article, which is an WP:RSMUSIC, and an album review in The Syncopated Times now cited too. The BBC website has evidence on his contributions, including Dalby and the orchestra he founded playing a significant section on BBC Radio 2 - see [2]. ResonantDistortion 18:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I gather that the reason this article was nominated for deletion less than 7 hours after it was created is that it was previously deleted, 7 years ago. Given that the article has an Under Construction notice, though, surely more time could have been allowed for the article creator to work on it? It could have been tagged for whatever the issues were thought to be, rather than bringing it straight to AfD. And, article creator, I recommend that you work on new articles as drafts and move them when they're more ready. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:18, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
- You're right, it would have been better if I'd moved it to draft rather than taken it straight to AFD. Wikishovel (talk) 10:25, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep The subject and the band he founded have had verified major segments on national radio ([3] in 2015) and on national TV ([4] in 1988). This meets WP:MUSICBIO#12. Also - there are a number of secondary sources sufficient to provide, at minimum, coverage for a start class biographical article. Article has also been significantly updated since nomination with 11 citations added. ResonantDistortion 20:10, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep, WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS, meets WP:MUSICBIO #1, 10 and 12. RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:28, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- weak keep: Likely enough for a weak pass at musical notability. The extra sources mentioned above help the situation. Oaktree b (talk) 18:19, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep is appropriate here, there is a lot of well-sourced material here, therefore it meets WP:MUSICBIO, WP:SIGCOV, and WP:RS. Therefore it should be kept as it is and the discussion should be closed as Keep, and the page is not deleted. Mrtoadtv (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2025 (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.