Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irene Bridger
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Meets WP:MUSICBIO, notability demonstrated by reliable sources. (non-admin closure) LlamaAl (talk) 00:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Irene Bridger (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 artist does not meet WP:MUSICBIO Thegoosler (talk) 19:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as not notable enough for keep. That could change in years to come, but is not the case now. Kierzek (talk) 02:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 January 21. Snotbot t • c » 21:03, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 16:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 16:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - This article clearly meets the first criterion of Wikipedia's notability guidelines for musicians; Bridger "has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself". Passing one of the criteria is all that is necessary to demonstrate notability. Neelix (talk) 12:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep – per Neelix, I think the sourcing here is sufficient, in particular with the 2007 article in The Pilot. As an additional note, this singer was twice-nominated for Inspirational Album of the Year at the Covenant Awards. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 01:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Per Rs coverage, supported by nominations.--Epeefleche (talk) 13:02, 7 February 2013 (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.