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The result was withdrawn TheWeakWilled (T * G) 19:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolas Bacri[edit]

Nicolas Bacri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Poorly sourced BLP since creation in 2005, challenged since creation, unimproved since creation Jubilee♫clipman 04:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Bacri appears on WP:MET, meaning he has an entry in at least one music encyclopedia (probably The New Grove). If he's good enough for a music encyclopedia, he's good enough for ours. Chubbles (talk) 04:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete—if this article has been challenged and still not improved since 2005, it's had its chance. The fact that Chubbles (talk · contribs) can only speculate as to one possible reliable source exemplifies this. ╟─TreasuryTag►UK EYES ONLY─╢ 09:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not speculation; the list was specifically created from a listing of several music encyclopedias. The project is worth your investigating further. Chubbles (talk) 15:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So to stop it being AfDed in future we simply place "this article is in MET" at the bottom and everyone will wink knowingly at each other and pass on? (See my comment over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theodore Antoniou...) --Jubilee♫clipman 21:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I have done is inform you that the article is not unverifiable, that reliable sources exist, and that the article meets the guidelines at WP:MUSIC. If you ignore all this, you rob the encyclopedia of encyclopedic information. You choose. Chubbles (talk) 21:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Er, I have just gone through all 11 of the Criteria for composers and lyricists and the answer was 0 (or not specified in article) each time. Not necessarily enough for deletion of itself, of course, but it does highlight the pointlessness of our debate. I am going to resume my checking of the list I mentioned elsewhere now that I have taken time out to check how these are going. I withdrew one AfD of an article that was actually being improved rather than being the subject of some weird twilight zone. --Jubilee♫clipman 21:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final thought then I'm off to bed for the night: In order to meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true. It is not enough to make vague claims in the article or assert a band's importance on a talk page or AfD page – the article itself must document notability. from WP:MUSIC. As I understand this, the article must both establish notability and cite a source verifying it. --Jubilee♫clipman 00:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. The article is certainly a horror, however he has one CD out released by BIS (which I've added to the article) and there are other ones. Some work is needed there. --Kleinzach 02:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Although the article is a neutrality nightmare, of which I've attempted to clean up, he does seem to have some other book refs and news refs, although I did not fully delve into them as most are in French. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 14:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Borderline keep Keep. I've added a few references. When his Sixth Symphony was a finalist in Masterprize 2003 the reviews were universally bad, but bad can still be notable! Actually he didn't come off quite as badly as some of his fellow finalists. What swings it for me is the fact that BIS finds him worthy of a commercial recording. --Deskford (talk) 15:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm now convinced by the references subsequently added. --Deskford (talk) 09:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Unambiguous Keep. I've just added the following references:

Pernon, Gérard (ed.), "Bacri, Nicolas", Dictionnaire de la musique 5th edition, Editions Jean-Paul Gisserot, 2007, p.16.

France Musique (Radio France), Nicolas Bacri, Compositeur français

His work is also discussed in Pierrette Germain, Un demi-siècle de musique française, 1950-2000 and he's listed among the "prominent younger French composers" in The Harvard Dictionary of Music to name a few of the sources I found. It took me literally 5 minutes to find them. Sorry to rant, but no one should have voted "delete" in this discussion without doing the same. Voceditenore (talk) 07:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC) PS. I just added a second recording (for RCA Red Seal). Voceditenore (talk) 07:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• NB: Withdraw AfD - Subject now verifiably notable following extensive work by various editors. --Jubilee♫clipman 13:37, 13 January 2010 (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.