Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cass McCombs

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. I sympathize with McCombs's desire to have the article deleted, but the sources provided in the AFD clearly indicate notability. Past vandalism, while worrisome, is not a good reason for deletion in and of itself, and can be handled in other ways. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 14:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cass McCombs

Cass McCombs (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

The article in it's current form is speediable, but in the interest of fairness, it probably was not before I removed alot lot of text to the talk page. I do not think this one is particularly notable. The subject has also requested deletion. NonvocalScream (talk) 13:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Delete notability is margina, deletion requested by subject, fairness and courtesy support deletion. Guy (Help!) 13:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep: However much the subject has (allegedly) requested deletion, a very casual Google search turned up that one of his albums was named on Amazon.com's Best of 2007 list, he was featured in separate half-hour AND fifteen minute pieces on NPR's World Cafe last October and December, respectively (the transcripts of which are linked off of NPR's website), he was signed last fall by Domino Records, a major indie label ... folks, this meets WP:MUSIC going away.  RGTraynor  14:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Ticket #2008040910002834 / per your use of "allegedly" I will ask for a review of the ticket. NonvocalScream (talk) 14:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Comment: Just confirming (and Guy will likely do the same) that the subject has indeed asked for the article to be deleted. There is no "allegedly" about it, the subject is in contact with us via OTRS. Nick (talk) 14:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, no sources about him. His album being named one of a fairly large set of recommendations (more than a hundred) by an online retailer does not count as a "notable award". --Relata refero (disp.) 14:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Comment: Err -- two feature length interviews with him on National Public Radio absolutely constitute reliable sources about him.  RGTraynor  14:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• About. NPR also interviewed a custodian at my university twice. --Relata refero (disp.) 14:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Reply: You're parsing words. The interviews are ABOUT McCombs, yes. Feel free to follow the links and listen for yourself. (And quite aside from anything else, if NPR had two pieces totalling forty-five minutes about your custodian, yes, he'd pass WP:V too.)  RGTraynor  15:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Nonencyclopædic Avi (talk) 15:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per my long-standing belief that subjects of marginal notability should be able to "opt-out" on request. - Philippe 15:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Comment maybe the articles on his albums should be added into this discussion (Dropping the Writ (Cass McCombs album), A (Cass McCombs album), PREfection). Guest9999 (talk) 17:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Anyone do a Google News search? There are several articles specifically about him. I wouldn't call him borderline notable. Why not just protect the article? Zagalejo^^^ 18:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I haven't done a count on what articles cover what, but a lot are just "Cass McCombs and Artist X, The Party Room, Aug. 18, 7:30 p.m.", or reviews of gigs he's been in as a secondary act, where the main focus is on the primary act. Ral315 (talk) 20:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
    • Sure, some of the articles are like that, but there are also a few interviews with him (specifically) and lots of album reviews. Zagalejo^^^ 20:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, per Philippe and JzG. Marginal notability shouldn't force an article, otherwise I'd probably have one. Ral315 (talk) 20:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep This is a clear pass for WP:MUSIC, which was obvious before the nominator gutted the article just prior to nominating it for deletion. McCombs passes WP:MUSIC bullet point 1 by leaps and bounds, and has releases on 4AD and Domino Records; he also toured with Modest Mouse. So, total, we have him as notable per WP:MUSIC points 1, 4, 5, and 12. Chubbles (talk) 20:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• As I was honest about the gutting in the nomination. There was a sourcing issue. [removed] The notability guideline, is just that, a guideline, advisory in nature. The community is free, as they always have been, to make decisions on an article, individually. NonvocalScream (talk) 21:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Fair enough, removed. That said, he's really not marginally notable; he's quite famous. I don't normally check AfD very often, but I looked at this one because I'd heard of him before. Famous people should be encyclopedically documented whether they like it or not. Chubbles (talk) 21:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• I added on to my comment regarding guidelines since your reply. NonvocalScream (talk) 21:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• If he were an absolute borderline case requesting deletion, I'd say you'd have a stronger case here. But he's had tons of media coverage and critical acclaim. In the interest of comprehensiveness (and I can't see any reason to not strive for that), he ought to be documented here as a culturally and musically significant figure. Chubbles (talk) 21:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the notability guideline is indeed a guideline, although it'd be tough to argue that someone who provably passes four of the (not at all easy or soft) criteria is somehow non-notable, and I'd be interested to hear why the Delete voters feel someone who passes them is nonetheless non-notable. But WP:V is not a guideline; indeed it is rock-solid policy. I've been tarred with the deletionist brush more than once, but there's no way I'd ever not change a Delete vote after being presented with sources of this quality and in these numbers.  RGTraynor  13:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Notability is conveyed by the presence of multiple reliable sources about the subject. We've got plenty more than two sources here: he's notable. Nyttend (talk) 01:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Meets WP:MUSIC on more than one point (least controversial of which #12), has proper sources. Voyaging^(talk) 19:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per Chubbles. --Bardin (talk) 14:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. The bulk of the article (before it was moved to the talk page) was unsourced and needed some format editing, but the artist in question meets notability. Criteria number 5 in particular (he released an album on 4AD (Cocteau Twins, Pixies) and Domino Records (Pavement, The Magnetic Fields, Elliott Smith). Pele Merengue (talk) 22:09, 17 April 2008 (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.