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The result was Withdrawn by nominator. The subject has withdrawn their request. Runame (talk) 19:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Liss[edit]

Scott Liss (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This is an article about a musician who does not meet any of the qualifications for notabity in WP:MUSIC except for possibly #1 (subject of coverage multiple non-trivial, independent soruces). However only one of the articles is still online and I'm not sure it really rises above trivial coverage, in any case it's just one source from a hometown paper. The other sources are archived, or are very passing mentions of him, or are Facebook/iTunes/official site sort of stuff and wouldn't count toward notability.

The subject of the article has asked me to nominate it for deletion and suggested the creation of the article may have been promotional in nature. Based on WP:MUSIC I think this person is probably of marginal notability at best, given the sources, so I am inclined to lean toward deletion given the subject's request. Runame (talk) 19:23, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete at subject's request. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete If the subject requested it (is that verified?). This is an interesting one - at first glance the band itself seems like it should be notable, and the two linked albums seem to also meet WP:NALBUMS but I don't think the artist himself is notable. Perhaps the issue was that the creator went with a bio instead of an article about the group. In any case I'd say he fails WP:GNG on his own. §FreeRangeFrog 22:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep, unless there is a clearer reason for deletion; unconfirmed, unexplained request from subject is not sufficient. A few sources exist (already cited there or in The Blackpool Letters article), and notability and verifiability don't depend on sources remaining available for free online. Maybe merge both album articles to the musician's page. Peter James (talk) 12:39, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The subject will confirm the request if it's an issue but just doesn't want to make a big deal out of it. --Runame (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:18, 25 November 2012 (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.