Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bald Freak Music

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2009 November 30.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 all the rest, but merge and redirect Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal to Guns N' Roses. JohnCD (talk) 20:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bald Freak Music

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

promotional article, unremarkable label, lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources. Appears to have been written by the company itself by a blocked user. RadioFan (talk) 13:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 13:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following artist pages linked from this page because they lack significant 3rd party coverage to meet notability guidelines. The articles here have been edited largely by the artists themselves or usernames matching the label name and appear to be promotional in nature.:

Even if I can't find any notable reference, the article on Swashbuckle (band) is present on the Italian Wikipedia, so I think it's relevant enough. Here's the article: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swashbuckle
- Comment Presence on another volunteer edited wikipedia does not demonstrate notability. The article should likely be deleted there as well. What is your connection with this band?--RadioFan (talk) 13:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The English Wikipedia article is just a translation of the Italian one, so slavishly close as even to use "actually" as a translation of "attualmente", which looks like "actually" but actually means "at present". However, the Italian article has no references at all, so to use it as a justification for the English one, which has some (although inadequate) references is crazy. Also the Italian article has in the past been tagged as being unsuitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 14:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I see that references have been recently added to Swashbuckle (band)‎, however they are all primary sources which do nothing to establish the notability of the subject.--RadioFan (talk) 14:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - in fact I should say speedy delete. I have looked at all of the articles, and checked all of their references. Virtually all of the refs are clearly to primary sources, and I can't really see much assertion of significance in the articles either. There is no evidence of notability for any of them. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge notable information from all these articles into Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal. Thal is clearly notable; he has been a regular member of Guns N' Roses (#6 in Criteria for musicians and ensembles), played on their album Chinese Democracy which went Platinum (criteria 3), and also tours with Lita Ford (criteria 6 again). --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal might be able to meet notability guidelines but the only claim that is backed-up by a reference is the connection with Guns and Roses. If no references can be found backing up all the other claims then perhaps Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal should be selectively merged into Guns and Roses. Also, what notable information did you see in the other articles as worthy of merging into Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal? they seem related only by label.--RadioFan (talk) 19:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hm, good point. I'm willing to look for sources for Thal. If I can't find much, I can merge into Guns N' Roses. I didn't mean to say I actually found anything notable in the other articles—just that we could look. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 21:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up comment I have spent some time cleaning up Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal and adding sources. I think there is enough there to be its own article. I have not found anything in reliable sources about all his sideproject, so those should all be deleted. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 03:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Primary source refs + no notability Cynof Gavuf 12:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you review the work I did on the Thal article? You are saying they should all be deleted? --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment about Ron Thal Thanks to Spike Wilbury for the work he has done in chasing up references. He has established that Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal just about has evidence of notability, but not much. For example, one of the sources given says The Islanders have a new ad campaign featuring music by Ron (Bumblefoot) Thal...I'd be more impressed if I had heard of Mr. Thal before today, but I have heard of Guns N' Roses and not much more, except that "Bumblefoot" is the name of a disease of birds and rodents. OK, not all the sources are as minimal as that, but altogether his notability seems to be based on membership of a notable band, rather than individual notability. Spike Wilbury says Thal is clearly notable; he has been a regular member of Guns N' Roses (#6 in Criteria for musicians and ensembles), but he may not have noticed that that guideline also says Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band. Thus the correct thing is to redirect his article to the band's article, merging anything from his present article that seems worth keeping. On the other hand we seem to have a clear consensus that the other four articles should all be deleted. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:27, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks James. I am okay with merging, since there is not much left about Thal after I cut out all the fat. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:29, 25 November 2009 (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.