Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marvin Goldstein

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. Sufficient coverage appears to have been shown to meet WP:BASIC. RL0919 (talk) 05:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marvin Goldstein

[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)

This article has been around for over 10 years and in all that time no WP:RS have appeared to back up this pianist's notability outside LDS circles. There is a Spanish article with similarly bad referencing (LDS, Amazon and AllMusic), and a French one with nothing. Doesn't seem to satisfy WP:MUSICBIO or WP:NALBUM, unless we consider his collaboration with Country star Billy Dean, attributed to this one of three local mentions in the Florida Panhandle. It seems that it does meet WP:PROMO though. StonyBrook (talk) 01:18, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:29, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:29, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:29, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I see coverage in state-level publications (e.g., 1 2 3 ) as well as local/regional news ( 4 5 ). Marvin just gets over the line for notability per WP:BASIC. FOARP (talk) 07:49, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If this is going to stay, page has to be improved. More sources added. Otherwise delete. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:33, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I just checked on the one reference in question and it doesn't load so in current form, there's no choice but to delete. Can't have the page written without a single source. Get some sources and this could change. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:35, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The present state of the page is not the issue at question. What matters per WP:NEXIST is whether the subject is notable at all - independent of the state of referencing on the page. FOARP (talk) 09:59, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:BASIC. I have added some sources to the article, which could still use some work, but there are certainly reviews of his concerts and articles about him. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:14, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as multiple references to significant coverage in reliable sources have been identified and added to the article so that it clearly passes WP:GNG and deserves to be kept in the encyclopedia Atlantic306 (talk) 16:26, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep we have enough coverage to justify keeping the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - lack of reliable third-party coverage, which is one of the key requirements for WP:GNG. If this was a biography of a religious figure than it would be a different story, but for a minor musician much stronger coverage is need to ensure encyclopedic quality. Inter&anthro (talk) 00:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. With multiple independent sources having been added, the subject passes WP:BASIC. Rollidan (talk) 20:21, 11 July 2019 (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.