Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Appelbaum

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. Star Mississippi 01:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Larry Appelbaum

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article about a recently deceased music engineer, not properly sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. As written, this literally just states that he existed and then died, without documenting even one thing about his career that could be measured against NMUSIC criteria at all, and for referencing it cites one primary source (the self-published website of an organization he was directly affiliated with) that isn't support for notability and one newspaper article that's a valid start toward WP:GNG but not enough all by itself. And while there's a "this article can be expanded from German" notice on it, the German article (which was also created within the past week based on his death) has more text but is still based entirely on primary and unreliable sourcing (a paid-inclusion legacy.com obituary, a directory of his contributions to a magazine where he was the author of content about other things rather than the subject of content written by other people, etc.) rather than WP:GNG-building reliable sources. So even if we did translate the other article, we'd still need to see much better sourcing anyway.
As this is a specialized subject I don't have a lot of knowledge about, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with more expertise can salvage the article with more substance about his career and better sourcing for it, but one obituary isn't enough to make him "inherently" notable just for existing. Bearcat (talk) 18:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 18:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment From a quick internet search, plenty of sources appear that build a strong case for notability. Why not just tag the article for notability instead of nominating it for deletion? Thriley (talk) 18:10, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Engineering. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Obituaries in Washington Post, Downbeat, etc. AllyD (talk) 09:35, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Current citations demonstrate GNG is met. Thriley (talk) 06:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per WP:HEY.Thanks. -Mushy Yank. 21:37, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG. A simple google search shows many articles for establishing notability. Nyasalones (talk) 08:20, 7 March 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.