867:
3rd place in one of many categories in the
International Songwriter Competition, does not do it for me either. I have no idea how prominent that ISC competition is in the music industry, but it didn't appear that professional to me by reviewing their web site. Therefore I support DELETE based on lack of
866:
Deleted references to subjects website as they are not valid citations. Now, we have two left to consider. One, she is the subject of a writer's choice award, I can think of high school students who have recieved similiar awards who are known only by their family and friends. The second item, the
636:
is there are people who will vote keep for an unsourced, non-notable, unwikified stub and yet will not fix it, expand it, or source it. It's not an accusation of hypocracy, it's a statement of fact. If someone thinks this article should be expanded, they should expand it, not expect others to do so.
691:
Voting for keeping an article in no way obligates one to work towards fixing and enhancing that article. We should vote keep if the given article covers a subject that is notable and verifiable, which apparently this is, although the article may be poorly written and poorly sources. A poorly done
190:
Apparently I didn't. I don't care about Amy per se (I apologize for this discussion here), but I am at loss why
Knowledge (XXG) should not to allow articles to incubate for a few days before nominating for deletion. Now only content of stub articles is going to be why that person is notable, and of
727:
No independent evidence presented, in the the article or in this discussion, that Amy Loftus is yet a musician of any importance. The only sources cited are her website and an online store that sells nothing but CDs from small, independent musicians. Note the absence of any reviews from mainstream
597:
I am very mindful of being civil. I very carefully wrote that the votes were the joke, not the editors. I choose my words carefully and I always hope that people will read carefully. The comment did turn out to be helpful as it stimulated some positive edits on the article, which was one of my
205:
After Morven thoughtfully added notability information to the article, I have changed my "vote" to "keep" because now the notability is properly asserted and referenced. So ironic that the deletionists saved the article and the inclusionists made no edits on it (see earlier discussion, which is
664:
I don't subscribe that there is a moral impetus to expand an article (afterall, we're all volunteers), and the idea that there should be social pressure that force people to do so is repugnant to me. Nor do I subscribe the idea that opinions can be automatically discounted on
Knowledge (XXG) if
571:
So many advocates for the article and yet not a single one has enhanced it, not even the "Strong Keep" or the article's creator, despite being notified. The only two people to enhance it proposed the deletion and voted for deletion. What a joke all these "keep" votes turn out to be!
372:
No reference, so the BBC airplay assertion counts as original research. Anyone can hire a producer to make a record. That doesn't make a person notable. The
Songwriting Competition seems to be non-notable too, and being unsourced, is a dubious clami at this moment.
618:
It is collectively that the votes were "a joke" (singular), and I pointed to the irony that the edits (and that they advanced the article) were not made by the defenders. If you read hypocrisy out of that, then I'm sorry I wasn't clearer.
166:
Apparently you didn't. You couldn't be bothered to even do so little as to stub it. I did. I also moved some material from its talk page into the article. Articles don't need to be "full-length, fully referenced from day 0" (though it
701:
Agree, of course. The irony remains, nonetheless (as does the doubt on notability). I've been on the other side of the fence too, voting to keep an article and not having time or knowledge to improve it. And now this AfD has been
435:
To keep up the oddness of things, I just added those references into the article. No sense in it being deleted just because nobody could be bothered to actually improve it. I can't find any references to the claimed acting
156:
Hu, did I not get the memo? The article was created only 2006-12-05T00:45:08 ! It needs to be marked as stub and allowed to grow! Is there now some policy that article must be full-length, fully referenced from day 0 ?
732:. (As a quick reality check, another recent CD, "Exploration," published by an independent label, by two talented young folk singers neither of whom has or ought to have their own Knowledge (XXG) biography—
637:
Otherwise, the keep vote is merely an empty gesture that should be discounted since it relies neither on policy nor on the intent to bring the article up to the standards that would meet policy. --
741:
883:
Self-published sources are not acceptable to establish notability BUT are acceptable sources of non-controversial biographical detail. I have thus reverted your changes to the article.
607:
I don't believe its appropriate nor respectful to call other opinions "jokes" or to imply hypocrisy in other editors. Nor do I think editors should be taunted into editing.
677:). Your tolerance of inflammatory language is also not something I agree on. To me, Hu was bullying (whatever his intentions were), and for you, I think you're wrong.
168:
545:
I am a little concerned about the notability but I think that if we can clean up and provide proper refs then we can definitly keep this article. —
729:
673:
is not a factor. You also seem to miss the point of discussions and consensus if everything is as policy-driven as you claim it is (see
422:
The chances of the "keep" position succeeding would be enhanced if you or another supporter edited that information into the article.
17:
441:
411:
337:
272:
255:- Bob is so highly regarded in the UK and I when I saw Amy Loftus I instantly thought of Bob. Dunno if she's any good though ;-)
802:
286:
It's a stub, but about a seemingly notable person. Stubs are how many articles start. Let it expand, don't simply remove it. --
88:
83:
92:
356:
in his comment above. Unless you can explain why this would be incorrect, I don't think your 'vote' should be counted. -
892:
830:
453:
126:
913:
117:
Was nominated for speedy but a quick google suggested there might be notability; listing here for additional opinions.
36:
75:
178:
need to clearly indicate the notability of the subject. That is the main part of the memo you seem to have missed.
912:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
777:
651:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
251:: Has received airplay on BBC Radio 2 by Bob Harris which is the only thing swaying me away from a Delete per
361:
628:
I'm sorry, Hateless, but your argument doesn't hold water. Claiming Hu is being disrespectful by point out
491:
499:
391:
303:
896:
878:
858:
846:
834:
809:
785:
751:
709:
696:
683:
659:
623:
613:
602:
592:
576:
562:
537:
520:
502:
496:
488:
479:
457:
426:
417:
377:
363:
340:
322:
307:
290:
278:
243:
210:
195:
182:
161:
148:
130:
57:
554:
405:
334:
266:
728:
media.... indeed absence of any reviews at all. Amazon sales rank for her CD, "Straight to Amy," is
748:
357:
794:
666:
583:
733:
319:
49:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
888:
826:
806:
770:
644:
449:
299:
122:
872:
674:
670:
353:
316:
252:
172:
843:
547:
529:
399:
349:
331:
260:
79:
798:
692:
article on a notable and verifiable topic should be marked for cleanup, not deletion. --
394:
this is recognised by the BBC, should you be in doubt to the legitimacy of the website.
855:
765:
639:
517:
287:
225:
868:
817:: I have sourced several of the statements made in the article and noted that she was
224:
Notable enough, but this looks like it'll need a complete rewrite from the ground up.
745:
679:
609:
588:
875:
737:
693:
192:
158:
109:
884:
822:
598:
purposes in making the remark, and which none of the "keep" votes accomplished.
476:
445:
118:
516:- Delete unless sourced. Only assertion of notability is, "Positive reviews".
763:
to actually source the thing and show notability, then it can be recreated. --
71:
63:
706:
620:
599:
573:
423:
374:
207:
179:
145:
392:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/shows/bobharriscountry/furtherinfo.shtml
906:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
440:
episode, etc) but an "Amy Loftus" is in IMDB with a credit on
793:
I'm not seeing anything to meet the (admittedly guideline)
387:
703:
487:, stubby, yes, but definitely needs an urgent cleanup.
105:
101:
97:
390:→ Playlists → Country Show → January 19, 2006. Per
144:unless fleshed out very quickly. Clock is ticking.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
821:magazine's "Best New Singer/Songwriter" in 2005.
916:). No further edits should be made to this page.
352:made a clear assertion of her notability per
8:
442:Playboy Video Centerfold: The Dahm Triplets
395:
256:
510:some notability but needs a good scrub.
854:per new references added by Matthew
586:, Hu, this is not a helpful comment.
191:little meaning (who that person is).
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
764:
675:WIkipedia is not a bureaucracy
638:
632:is not very civil either. The
1:
897:11:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
879:09:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
859:01:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
58:00:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
847:01:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
835:23:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
810:15:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
786:22:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
752:22:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
710:08:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
697:06:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
684:23:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
660:22:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
624:21:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
614:21:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
603:21:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
593:20:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
577:18:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
563:15:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
538:14:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
521:13:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
503:08:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
480:06:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
458:22:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
427:08:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
418:23:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
378:13:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
364:13:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
341:05:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
323:03:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
308:03:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
291:01:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
279:01:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
244:00:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
211:23:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
196:10:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
183:09:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
162:09:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
149:00:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
131:00:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
933:
298:DEFINETLY cleanup though.
518:Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider)
909:Please do not modify it.
388:http://www.bobharris.org
171:and has been done), but
32:Please do not modify it.
885:Matthew Brown (Morven)
823:Matthew Brown (Morven)
759:and if someone can be
475:but of course clean.--
446:Matthew Brown (Morven)
119:Matthew Brown (Morven)
173:biographical articles
873:Biography Notability
801:about her, nor many
444:. Bizarre indeed.
386:Hu, playlist here (
783:
734:Sarah Lee Guthrie
730:#330,572 in Music
657:
924:
911:
799:reliable sources
784:
782:
780:
775:
768:
658:
656:
654:
649:
642:
561:
559:
552:
535:
532:
528:- and source. --
494:
416:
277:
241:
238:
235:
232:
113:
95:
55:
52:
34:
932:
931:
927:
926:
925:
923:
922:
921:
920:
914:deletion review
907:
819:Nashville Scene
778:
771:
766:
652:
645:
640:
555:
548:
546:
533:
530:
492:
438:Tracey Takes On
397:Kind Regards -
330:per Sharkface.
306:
258:Kind Regards -
239:
236:
233:
230:
206:posted below).
86:
70:
67:
53:
50:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
930:
928:
919:
918:
902:
901:
900:
899:
861:
849:
837:
812:
788:
754:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
716:
715:
714:
713:
712:
699:
616:
595:
566:
565:
540:
523:
511:
505:
482:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
430:
429:
420:
381:
380:
367:
366:
344:
343:
325:
310:
302:
293:
281:
246:
226:Andrew Lenahan
215:
214:
213:
200:
199:
198:
169:is recommended
151:
115:
114:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
929:
917:
915:
910:
904:
903:
898:
894:
890:
886:
882:
881:
880:
877:
874:
870:
865:
862:
860:
857:
853:
850:
848:
845:
841:
838:
836:
832:
828:
824:
820:
816:
813:
811:
808:
804:
800:
796:
792:
789:
787:
781:
776:
774:
769:
762:
758:
755:
753:
750:
747:
743:
739:
735:
731:
726:
723:
722:
711:
708:
704:
700:
698:
695:
690:
687:
686:
685:
682:
681:
676:
672:
668:
663:
662:
661:
655:
650:
648:
643:
635:
631:
627:
626:
625:
622:
617:
615:
612:
611:
606:
605:
604:
601:
596:
594:
591:
590:
585:
581:
580:
579:
578:
575:
570:
564:
560:
558:
553:
551:
544:
541:
539:
536:
527:
524:
522:
519:
515:
512:
509:
506:
504:
501:
498:
495:
490:
486:
483:
481:
478:
474:
471:
470:
459:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
434:
433:
432:
431:
428:
425:
421:
419:
415:
414:
409:
408:
403:
402:
398:
393:
389:
385:
384:
383:
382:
379:
376:
371:
370:
369:
368:
365:
362:
359:
355:
351:
348:
347:
346:
345:
342:
339:
336:
333:
329:
326:
324:
321:
318:
314:
311:
309:
305:
301:
297:
294:
292:
289:
285:
282:
280:
276:
275:
270:
269:
264:
263:
259:
254:
250:
247:
245:
242:
227:
223:
219:
216:
212:
209:
204:
201:
197:
194:
189:
186:
185:
184:
181:
177:
174:
170:
165:
164:
163:
160:
155:
152:
150:
147:
143:
142:
139:
135:
134:
133:
132:
128:
124:
120:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
56:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
908:
905:
869:Verifiablity
863:
851:
839:
818:
814:
803:google hits
790:
772:
760:
756:
738:Johnny Irion
724:
688:
678:
646:
633:
629:
608:
587:
568:
567:
556:
549:
542:
525:
513:
507:
484:
472:
437:
412:
406:
400:
396:
327:
320:Sharkface217
312:
295:
283:
273:
267:
261:
257:
248:
229:
221:
217:
202:
187:
175:
153:
140:
137:
136:
116:
45:
43:
31:
28:
807:Inner Earth
702:vandalized.
401:Heligoland
300:Staxringold
262:Heligoland
154:Strong Keep
141:weak Delete
844:Mukadderat
350:Heligoland
332:Briangotts
72:Amy Loftus
64:Amy Loftus
856:Dionyseus
705:Strange.
543:Weak keep
526:Weak keep
508:Weak Keep
338:(Contrib)
288:Falcorian
249:Weak Keep
218:Weak Keep
795:WP:MUSIC
761:bothered
746:Dpbsmith
680:hateless
667:WP:CIVIL
610:hateless
589:hateless
584:be civil
569:Comment:
413:Contribs
274:Contribs
876:Alan.ca
852:Keep —
815:Comment
740:—ranks
725:Delete.
694:The Way
689:Comment
582:Please
222:Cleanup
193:Valters
188:Comment
159:Valters
89:protect
84:history
864:Delete
840:Delete
797:, nor
791:Delete
757:Delete
749:(talk)
742:34,291
671:WP:AGF
557:(Talk)
550:Seadog
531:Kungfu
514:Delete
477:Meno25
354:WP:NMG
335:(Talk)
328:Delete
317:WP:BIO
315:Fails
313:Delete
253:WP:NMG
138:Delete
93:delete
500:e Ong
203:Keep:
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
871:and
779:girl
767:Elar
736:and
669:and
653:girl
641:Elar
634:fact
630:fact
534:Adam
485:Keep
473:Keep
407:Talk
304:talk
296:Keep
284:Keep
268:Talk
220:and
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
51:Yank
46:Keep
842:nn
744:).
489:Ter
410:|
404:|
358:Mgm
271:|
265:|
237:bli
54:sox
895:)
833:)
805:.
707:Hu
621:Hu
600:Hu
574:Hu
497:nc
456:)
424:Hu
375:Hu
240:nd
234:ar
231:St
228:-
208:Hu
180:Hu
176:do
146:Hu
129:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
48:.
893:C
891::
889:T
887:(
831:C
829::
827:T
825:(
773:a
647:a
493:e
454:C
452::
450:T
448:(
436:(
360:|
127:C
125::
123:T
121:(
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.