Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Fraser

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. Sam Walton (talk) 07:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Fraser

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

Poorly sourced WP:BLP of a musician which makes no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC; as written, it completely fails to list even one specific achievement that anyone can even measure against NMUSIC, but rather just asserts that he exists and then turns straight into an EPK-style listing of various things music critics have said about his talent — and the majority of those review quotes, further, are sourced to his own website. There's only one reliable source here (Ottawa Citizen) that can contribute anything toward whether or not he has the notability necessary to qualify for a Wikipedia article — and it's a deadlink. Essentially, this is a public relations advertisement rather than an encyclopedia article — a musician does not get an automatic inclusion freebie on Wikipedia just because he exists, if proper reliable source coverage supporting a claim of notability that would pass NMUSIC isn't present. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Musicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:45, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now in any case because although News, Books and browser found results with "Nick Fraser Toronto drummer", there's likely not enough yet. SwisterTwister talk 17:25, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:51, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree with what's said above, and my own searches have turned up nothing extra. There's really nothing out there to write an article. mikeman67 (talk) 23:39, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator, especially the observation that there's not even an assertion of notability here. NewYorkActuary (talk) 08:13, 13 October 2015 (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.