Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Music

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnomieBOT (talk | contribs) at 19:44, 15 October 2025 (Archiving closed XfDs (errors?): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Streamtuner). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Shortcut
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Music. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Music|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Music. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Related deletion sorting


Music

Benümb / Pig Destroyer

Benümb / Pig Destroyer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NALBUM; no notability aside from one Exclaim! article about the album. No obvious WP:ATD since it's a collaboration between two bands. UnregisteredBiohazard talk to me 03:02, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Maybe Pig Destroyer discography since that band has a majority of the album, is the one that has a chronology box and a discography page that includes this album? Katzrockso (talk) 03:14, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:21, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: A redirect would be unhelpful to readers in this situation per WP:XY:

    Redirects…that could equally point to multiple targets are commonly deleted, as there is no way to determine which topic a reader is searching for. In these cases, search results may be more helpful, allowing the reader to make the decision.

    Left guide (talk) 05:37, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Striking "delete" !vote in light of sources presented below. I can't vouch for their reliability, but want to allow others a chance to review, and don't want to stand in the way of consensus. Left guide (talk) 22:24, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep per WP:SPINOFF, as there is nowhere to put the information without duplicating it, with this article serving as a good reference to the album from the other bands on the split itself. I would generally say this should be merged however there is nowhere for this to go. Debatably weakly notable per the non exhaustive small list of sources i found, unless I'm missing something. With any inherited notability from the two bands, I'd say it's good enough for mainspace, with work. [1][2] [3] [4] [5] [6] DarmaniLink (talk) 18:58, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for failing WP:GNG and WP:NALBUM or redirect to Pig Destroyer discography. We shouldn't keep something just because it's hard to choose a redirect target. The sources aren't there to justify a stand alone page.4meter4 (talk) 00:16, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:08, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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 redirect to Operación Triunfo (Argentine TV series). (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 21:46, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Claudio Basso

Claudio Basso (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A biography of a living person article that was started in 2006, and has no real sourcing (besides discog). It has been tagged "BLP source" since March 2019. Claims to be a noted musician but I am not finding sources, this article fails WP:GNG. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 22:12, 13 October 2025 (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.
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 redirect to Reba McEntire albums discography#Compilation albums. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 17:34, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20th Century Masters – The Millennium Collection: The Best of Reba McEntire

20th Century Masters – The Millennium Collection: The Best of Reba McEntire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NALBUM; no notability aside from one review from AllMusic. The album did chart, but charts are not an automatic golden ticket to notability. Suggesting a redirect to Reba McEntire albums discography. UnregisteredBiohazard talk to me 18:07, 13 October 2025 (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.
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. ✗plicit 00:28, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sean Taylor (Singer-Songwriter)

AfDs for this article:
Sean Taylor (Singer-Songwriter) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note: The article previously deleted as the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sean Taylor (singer-songwriter) was certainly not identical to the current article, but it was broadly similar. The current article has fewer references than that one, but I have not checked their quality. Nor have I reviewed the reasons for deletion in that discussion to assess whether they still apply, but participants in this discussion may like to do so. JBW (talk) 14:51, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't appear to meet criteria for WP:MUSICBIO or WP:SINGER. I did search for additional resources or information but could only find this: https://www.irishpost.com/entertainment/ten-minutes-with-sean-taylor-274568 Where it states he's been nominated for awards. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 16:33, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) — moved to Sean Taylor (singer-songwriter) — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 16:57, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discography, awards, media and more references are added to the article, so keep it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodoklecksel (talk • contribs) 17:11, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly confident that being runner up for an award does not establish notability. I did minor fixes to the citations and information you added. My initial thoughts on the article are the same. He may have a promising career ahead of him, but I don't think notability is established. That's why I nominated the article rather than requesting speedy deletion though. Lets let the discussion play out. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 18:02, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are over two decades of international touring, festivals etc., opening act for numerous famous folk-, blues- and rockmusicians, publishing regular albums in collaboration with notable producers, reviews in many european musicmagazins... I think, there are many aspects to approve, that this professional songwriter is relevant and this article should stay in wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodoklecksel (talk • contribs) 21:13, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I (successfully) nominated it for deletion last time round and am really disappointed to see it back with so little change, especially as its last incarnation had a WP:COI problem, being written by the subject itself. Comes nowhere near meeting WP:SINGER. I would like to know how the creator of this article became aware of its subject. Orange sticker (talk) 15:14, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already brought to AFD so Soft deletion is not an option. I also think there is an unbolded "Keep" here in this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:25, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Sean Taylor (singer-songwriter) first then DELETE so that both Articles for deletion discussions are linked to at the same talk pages if anyone tries to make this page again. 147.161.236.94 (talk) 15:39, 23 October 2025 (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.
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. Complex/Rational 21:26, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

King & Queen (group)

King & Queen (group) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No WP:SIGCOV available. The only passing mention I could find was one of their songs mentioned in this Master's thesis. De-prodded by User:Calathan in 2012. No obvious redirect target. Suriname0 (talk) 20:18, 12 October 2025 (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.
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. Salvio giuliano 15:28, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isis / Pig Destroyer

Isis / Pig Destroyer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only review I found is by Cleveland Scene: [9]. It alone is not enough for notability. Mika1h (talk) 15:13, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it's not a review of the EP after all so there's no significant coverage. --Mika1h (talk) 15:16, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; no independent, reliable sources exist monkeysmashingkeyboards (talk) 18:55, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not possible. You cannot redirect to multiple target articles.4meter4 (talk) 21:49, 12 October 2025 (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.
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 no consensus. I don't see a consensus emerging here after another week. Liz Read! Talk! 23:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Music on demand

Music on demand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Feels redundant to music streaming service. Tone is a bit off, and working this into music streaming service with inline citations may be better. ViperSnake151  Talk  22:00, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Strong oppose deletion. This may be an old term, but it is still in use and is an encyclopedic one and we should cover it. Further this term is not synonymous with streaming. Streaming refers to a delivery method for multimedia (ie an Applications of distributed computing) where as "music on-demand" is a business model which uses streaming (but also downloading). They are related but not the same. Napster for example was a music-on-demand business that did not use streaming technology; only downloading technology. Note that this source and this source defines music-on-demand as encompassing both streaming and downloading music so it actually a larger topic than streaming. The distinction is also discussed in this book which discusses the difference between live streaming and on-demand platforms. This is important because laws have been built around this broader category governing copyright infringement over the internet. The history of the internet and music streaming/downloading would reasonably cover this term. Here is an entire book devoted to this topic using this language: Haller, Albrecht (2001). Music on Demand: Internet, Abrufdienste und Urheberrecht. Orac. ISBN 9783700714729. PBS still uses the term for its coverage of music streaming. Government documents (and laws around streaming) (for example) use the term. The term gets used in academic publications on the music business and digital media and not just in the early internet era but in the last decade including in 2025. See for example [10], [11], [12], and [13], [14], [15].4meter4 (talk) 03:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've had a quick look through some of these sources, as well as some of my own. I don't get a sense of a stable definition or concept. For instance, this book says "The broadcast and on-demand models are governed by different rules, but they share one important feature: neither depends on downloading files or finding storage space on a personal computer." This seems to contradict your definition of MOD being a catch-all for downloading and streaming. Vladimir.copic (talk) 22:32, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are probably some variations across countries. Overall I think I accurately reflected the predominant view in the literature. Regardless, that hardly discredits this as not deserving of an article.4meter4 (talk) 19:35, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above, conflation with streaming services serves to suggest this is redundant or somehow a duplicate topic when that isn't the case. It covers a concept that was more broadly prominent in the 2000s and replaced by streaming, rather than being the same thing. And there's no overall article for on-demand distribution as far as I can tell (this seems like an oversight). While the article could use improvement, it's not unsourced and this shouldn't really serve as grounds for deletion. KaisaL (talk) 01:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As per the arguments from 4Meter4 and KaisaL. But also, as a matter of policy, halo effects like tone and marginal inline citations are specifically matters for editing, and not for AfD nominations. Even “redundancy” is a marginal reason, as long as there is some basic difference between treatments of the subjects of the articles, such that the articles are not mostly direct copies - and there is enough difference between “Music on Demand” and “streaming” (as those of us who were adults in the 90s will remember) to warrant seperate articles. Absurdum4242 (talk) 05:04, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Original research with no footnoting or clarity on what in the sources supports the content. Stifle (talk) 16:31, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 22:49, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Music streaming service. Looks like this was created in 2006 in anticipation of what became music streaming. That article was probably unknowingly created in 2009 when this could have been filled out and moved. The above make good points, but this looks like a fork of music streaming, which is a better article. So a redirect would solve every concern and preserve this page content and history. ←Metallurgist (talk) 02:45, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As explained earlier music on demand involves other types of applications other than streaming. Not all music on demand businesses used streaming technology, so redirecting there is not appropriate.4meter4 (talk) 02:16, 31 October 2025 (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.
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. Even without discarding the currently-blocked SPA/COI editor, there's a clear consensus to delete. Continued behaviour issues should be taken to AN/I. Owen× ☎ 21:14, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Rey Malto

AfDs for this article:
John Rey Malto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears well sourced, but that is related to Malto's clients and not him as a business person. Does not appear factors have changed meaningfully since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Rey Malto two years ago. Star Mississippi 20:55, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Philippines. Star Mississippi 20:55, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – The subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines as there are multiple reliable, independent sources that provide significant coverage. John Rey Malto has been recognized in reputable award-giving bodies such as Asia's Triumphant Awards (Outstanding Showbiz Personality of the Year, 2024) and Top Model Philippines (Recognized Contributor Writer in the Showbiz World, 2024). In addition, his work has been featured in mainstream media outlets and has contributed to the success of artists like Joice Espinoza, a finalist and winner in major national TV competitions (ABS-CBN's "It's Showtime: Tawag Ng Tanghalan" and GMA Network's "TiktoClock: Tanghalan Ng Kampeon"). These independent sources and recognitions establish lasting notability beyond routine coverage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhoma22 (talk • contribs) — Jhoma22 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
(Nominator note, copied over from this edit wheir Jhoma22 accidentally placed it. Star Mississippi 21:53, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Copying from @Jhoma22 posted here. Response. Thank you for your feedback. I will continue to improve this article with reliable sources and a neutral tone. Jhoma, please make the disclosures on your Talk and participate in the discussion on this page. Star Mississippi 00:56, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Media Coverage - Manila Bulletin — “Aliw Awards nominee Joice Espinoza drops original song ‘Pangako Mo’” (mentions Malto as songwriter and mentor).[1] - Philstar — “'Tawag ng Tanghalan' alum Joice Espinoza to release new single 'Hanggang sa Muli'” (notes Malto’s role in her career and his recognition in the music industry).[2] - Asian Journal — “Mesmerizing voice of Joice Espinoza of Olongapo City” (credits Malto as her manager and songwriter).[3] - LionhearTV — “Meet Joice Espinoza, singer behind viral song ‘Pangako Mo’” (acknowledges Malto as composer and mentor).[4]

References

  1. ^ "Aliw Awards nominee Joice Espinoza drops original song 'Pangako Mo'". Manila Bulletin. December 23, 2024. Retrieved October 11, 2025.
  2. ^ "'Tawag ng Tanghalan' alum Joice Espinoza to release new single 'Hanggang sa Muli'". The Philippine Star. July 16, 2025. Retrieved October 11, 2025.
  3. ^ "Mesmerizing voice of Joice Espinoza of Olongapo City". Asian Journal. October 9, 2024. Retrieved October 11, 2025.
  4. ^ "Meet Joice Espinoza, singer behind viral song 'Pangako Mo'". LionhearTV. December 2024. Retrieved October 11, 2025.

Awards & Recognition - Global Music Awards (2024) — Silver Medal Winner for Original Score/Soundtrack for Film and Television (song “Pangako Mo”). - Europe Music Video Awards (2024) — Best Musical for “Pangako Mo.” - Asia’s Triumphant Awards (2024) — Outstanding Showbiz Personality of the Year.

These demonstrate independent recognition in the music and entertainment industry, with coverage by mainstream and entertainment media. Therefore, the article should be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhoma22 (talk • contribs)

  • Comment: The original creator of the page, who is also the main contributor, has now attempted to vote an additional time via an unsigned vote. While I am usually a proponent of WP:AGF, I am beginning to question whether or not Jhoma22 is the subject of the article. While editor conduct is not a reason to delete a page, I think at this point we need to take anything the author says in defense of the article with a mountain of salt. Foxtrot620 (talk) 01:13, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your comment. I would like to respectfully clarify that my intention here is to improve the article based on verifiable and reliable sources. Regardless of who has contributed, the decision in WP:AFD should be focused on notability and reliable sourcing, not on suspicions about editors. The article on John Rey Malto is supported by several independent, published sources that establish his notability in the entertainment industry. In line with WP:NOTABILITY and WP:V, the discussion should remain centered on whether the article meets Wikipedia’s standards. I will also continue to improve and expand the article with additional reliable sources. —Jhoma22 (talk) 01:50, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Keep – The subject clearly meets WP:ENT and WP:NPERSON criteria for notability. John Rey Malto has received multiple independent, reliable coverage from established news outlets and entertainment publications. His achievements include:

Recognized with awards such as Outstanding Showbiz Personality of the Year (Asia’s Triumphant Awards 2024) and other independent accolades.

Credited as songwriter of “Pangako Mo”, performed by Joice Espinoza, which gained over 1.2 million views on Facebook and earned international recognition, including the Global Music Awards 2024 (Silver Medal Winner) and the Europe Music Video Awards 2024 (Best Musical).

Featured in independent media coverage from reputable entertainment news sources, demonstrating reliable third-party recognition of his contributions to the industry.

The article is supported by independent reliable sources (meeting WP:RS), and coverage is not trivial or routine. This establishes lasting notability per WP:GNG.

Therefore, the article should be kept and further improved rather than deleted. —Jhoma22 (talk) 01:50, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some unreliable sources from the two articles (Pangako Mo and John Rey Malto) such as WP:IMDB and WP:LIONHEARTV. The main issue is that the creator hasn't worked to improve or clarify the content, making several sections unsatisfactory and poorly written, possibly due to LLM use. That's why my decision is to support delete too. Additionally, I suggested to propose the deletion of the song article for specific reasons. AdobongPogi masarap 🍛 06:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep — The subject clearly meets the Wikipedia notability guideline (WP:GNG) and the criteria for artists (WP:NARTIST). John Rey Malto has been covered in multiple reliable, independent, and secondary sources, including Asian Journal, Manila Bulletin, Philippine Star, and LionhearTV. These publications discuss his achievements as a talent manager, songwriter, and director for an international modeling competition, demonstrating significant coverage and lasting contribution to the Philippine entertainment industry.

The article is neutrally written, verifiable, and supported by independent references. Deletion would remove well-sourced and encyclopedic content about a notable Filipino showbiz personality.

Independent and reliable sources include:

  • Asian Journal — “John Rey Malto, a Modern Renaissance Man” — confirms his role as Philippine Director for the International Modeling Competition – Runway Model Universe and his contributions to the entertainment industry.
  • Manila Bulletin — “Aliw Awards nominee Joice Espinoza drops original song ‘Pangako Mo’” — identifies him as the songwriter and mentor behind the single.
  • Philippine Star — “Tawag ng Tanghalan alum Joice Espinoza to release new single ‘Hanggang sa Muli’” — highlights his involvement in the artist’s music career.
  • LionhearTV — “Meet Joice Espinoza, singer behind viral song ‘Pangako Mo’” — verifies his songwriting work and influence in OPM.

Per WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST, John Rey Malto qualifies as a notable figure due to multiple reliable, independent publications covering his career, awards, and mentorship achievements.

He has also received significant recognition, including:

  • Global Music Awards 2024 – Silver Medal Winner for “Pangako Mo” (Original Score/Soundtrack for Film and Television)
  • Asia’s Triumphant Awards 2024 – Outstanding Showbiz Personality of the Year

The article follows a neutral tone, complies with verifiability, and reflects encyclopedic standards. I am open to improving formatting and sourcing further if needed, but this article clearly merits retention. Jhoma22 (talk) 01:50, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you using AI to wrote that?? and also why you voting again? Just like Foxtrot620 said. AdobongPogi masarap 🍛 14:15, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And stop adding this to the daily log (which didn't even have this on today's page!!). The only place to speak about this nomination is this page. Nowhere else. Nathannah • 📮 20:41, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (or Merge/Redirect if necessary) — The article presents a biographical entry about John Rey Malto, a verified figure in the Philippine entertainment industry who has received recognition from credible award organizations, including the Golden Star Awards (2022), Global Music Awards (2024), and Top Model Philippines (2024). His professional involvement in songwriting, talent management, and film production has been documented by independent and reliable sources. While additional citations may strengthen the article further, it already shows evidence of notability within the scope of media and entertainment.

If consensus determines that current sourcing is not yet sufficient for a standalone page, merging or redirecting the content to a related article (such as Pangako Mo (song) or Joice Espinoza) would still help preserve verified information and maintain encyclopedic value. Jhoma22 (talk) 17:55, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Deletethe autobiography (he’s redirected his user page to the article! What more proof do you need?) and block the spammer. Redirecting to additional titles in his garden is no help to anyone 70.158.100.194 (talk) 19:56, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • I understand the concern regarding the redirection and connection to the subject. However, deletion may not be the most constructive option at this stage. The article can still be improved through proper editing, neutral rewriting, and the addition of reliable, independent sources. It would be more appropriate to move the page to draft space or allow time for revisions, rather than removing it entirely. Constructive collaboration would help ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards for neutrality and verifiability. Jhoma22 (talk) 02:43, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails WP:N. The "Keep" votes are just plain WP:BLUDGEONING and are not helping here. UnregisteredBiohazard talk to me 20:40, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • I respect your point of view regarding the notability concern. However, there are verifiable references and recognitions that can support the subject’s notability once properly cited. The intention behind the “Keep” comments is not to overwhelm the discussion but to emphasize the potential for improvement through sourcing and neutral editing. Instead of deletion, moving the article to draft space would allow time to strengthen the references and address any issues related to notability or tone. Jhoma22 (talk) 02:46, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Draft / Keep: The article has potential notability based on verifiable achievements and recognitions. Although some parts may still need better sourcing, deletion would be premature at this stage. Moving the page to draft space would allow proper improvement and verification through reliable references. The subject has established contributions in the entertainment industry that can meet Wikipedia’s standards once the article is further developed. Jhoma22 (talk) 02:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Struck/unbolded multiple redundant "keep" !votes by article creator. @Jhoma22: Additional comments should not be marked as additional keep !votes, as this only causes confusion. Further, when a single commenter feels the need to respond to every opposing comment, it's just not a good look, especially when they're the only one on that side of the argument. In addition to the previous admonition about bludgeoning, I'd suggest reading about the Law of holes. --Finngall talk 19:37, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I unbolded another one, the "keep" between quotation marks in one of Jhoma's posts. --bonadea contributions talk 08:51, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – I made a good-faith attempt to find indications of notability. The awards/recognitions mentioned in the article don't show notability. The sources are either not about Malto himself, or else they are sponsored content/regurgitated press releases. I am unable to find anything better in terms of sourcing. --bonadea contributions talk 08:51, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails notability, some sources may be unreliable, and LLM-generated content. KuyaMoHirowo • he/him (DM me on Discord at kuyamohirowo (DMs are open!)) :3 12:42, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per user:Bearian's comment. Non-notable "talent manager". Iljhgtn (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Doesn’t seem to meet any of the standards for notability, has an overly promotional tone, and has those LLM problems too. An obvious delete on the merits, and numerous attempted votes by a single editor haven’t helped the case at all. Absurdum4242 (talk) 15:18, 16 October 2025 (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.
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! 23:03, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of music videos featuring nudity

List of music videos featuring nudity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NLIST and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. First of all, BLP nightmare. So much stuff is NOT cited, and there are clear examples of things that don't even count as nudity. Second, this really isn't a relevant list topic. INDISCRIMINATE to a tea. Also full of WP:OR. I get that AfD is not cleanup BTW, but other than not being notable, claiming musicians are swimming around naked without a source probably isn't very BLP friendly. jolielover♥talk 14:24, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Delete per nom. monkeysmashingkeyboards (talk) 21:33, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:01, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the other deleters. This is a WP:LISTCRIT nightmare as a quick glance through the current state of the list will attest to. Exactly what counts as "nudity" is far from clear. I'd further oppose a merge to the "Depictions of nudity" article, since that already has a noteworthy example, and adding much more would certainly be UNDUE. It might be possible to write a proper standalone article about "nudity in music videos" or whatever, on its own, but this list isn't even a start on that. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:10, 15 October 2025 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:24, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Denman

Paul Denman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Bass player that does not seem to be notable outside of membership of Sade. Prod declined due to many incoming links from Sade related articles. I think the Bass Player source is strong, but I cannot find additional sourcing that contributes notability to push the subject past WP:GNG. Mbdfar (talk) 22:38, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 03:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. I see no consensus but lots of opinions so let's make one more try to see if we can come to a rough agreement.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:40, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think there is a good argument here that Sweetback is its own separate band. It has its own news coverage away from Sade (such as [16], [17], ); although it is often lumped in scholarly works like here. Some of the newspaper sources I added had lengthy focus on Paul Denman. Overall I think there's enough here for a stand alone article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 4meter4 (talk • contribs) 28 October 2025
  • Keep per 4meter4 this is at least enough to pass WP:MUSICBIO. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:30, 29 October 2025 (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.
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. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 04:13, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tradisom

Tradisom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable record label. Of the 3 pages of google search results, there is nothing that is simultaneously reliable, independent and has significant coverage. WikiMacaroonsCinnamon? 15:10, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The statement in the above comment suggests the subject of the article is covered in multiple Portuguese sources. Chubbles (talk) 09:37, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 15:20, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 12 October 2025 (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.

Music Proposed deletions

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Music&oldid=1317006364"