317:
considerable amount of verifiable information is available in published newspapers, magazines, books and other artist websites referencing Mr. Chadbourne's works and contributions as a musician, writer and discographer (Rome Daily
Sentinel, the Houghton Mileau, Scene Magazine, Cleveland Magazine, the book "Bubblegum is the Naked Truth", and other books) which editors could add in instances where needed to improve the article. However, Knowledge (XXG)'s definition of "verifiable" clearly states that "The word "source" also includes "the creator of the work (for example, the writer), and the publisher of the work (for example, The New York Times)". The main hub of the entry has been verified with the proper licensing; I see nothing that "might damage the reputation of living people" (in this case, Mr. Chadbourne) and most of the sources listed are third party, including commercial online media sources such as Soundclick, the MyTV network, LastFM, Sizzle Radio) etc. One must consider that independent artists often use alternative media and will not grant license to mainstream media - whether it is hard copy or internet sourced precisely to remain "alternative and independent". That should not disqualify any article for inclusion simply because a google search doesn't produce immediate results. The article could use some up-dating, but is not in my opinion, irrelevant or insignificant. I noticed that Mr Chadbourne has a best selling single and album on Soundclick just doing a quick search on the site's main page which includes world wide sales. There is an independent article on Soundclick which demonstrates that this is a valid source for information.
404:
368:: If "a considerable amount" of verifiable information is available in reliable sources such as those, why not add them to the article? Furthermore, although self-published sources can be used to verify information, they cannot be used to establish notability. I'm glad they exist to verify, but what is there to show that Mark Chadbourne is notable? You've added three links to the article: one
316:
I disagreewith the assessment that the article is 'weak at best'. And I've noticed there has been significant deletions to this article recently including the discographies of the artist, and for which I do not see any editors' reasoning for doing so listed in the history of this article. A
372:, one written by a friend of his, and one potentially reliable and independent source. However, the reliable source shows chart listings for the song on what appears to be a relatively small TV station. Having #1 songs on that chart alone does not meet the criteria at
158:
189:
Unreferenced biography. The article weakly claims significance, so I declined an A7 speedy. However, I'm not finding any reliable sources to verify the information in the article, and notability is weak at best.
224:
403:
which isn't a recognized chart. And other claims like "His fixed harpsichord sonata "Area Sets" was lauded as a breakthrough composition by critics around the country." cannot be verfied as I
270:
119:
152:
247:
424:- this guy is clearly not notable, based on the lack of reliable sources about him, but there is a offtrack biker with the same name who might be notable.
206:
per nominator. This is an autobiography that doesn't include any reliable third party sources that can assert the subject's notability.
92:
87:
357:
353:
333:
96:
17:
399:
to establish notability. Claims for notability in the article are problematic. For example, chart claims appear to be based on
79:
173:
140:
448:
36:
134:
447:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
433:
416:
383:
337:
305:
285:
262:
239:
215:
197:
130:
61:
321:
349:
329:
83:
211:
345:
325:
313:
180:
75:
67:
379:
193:
166:
373:
429:
281:
258:
235:
56:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
146:
207:
369:
301:
396:
412:
425:
277:
254:
231:
50:
113:
400:
297:
408:
441:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
225:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
109:
105:
101:
165:
179:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
451:). No further edits should be made to this page.
271:list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions
8:
269:Note: This debate has been included in the
248:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
246:Note: This debate has been included in the
223:Note: This debate has been included in the
268:
245:
222:
407:any actual critical reception for it. --
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
395:- Lacks coverage in independent
1:
468:
306:23:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
286:22:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
263:22:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
240:22:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
216:18:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
198:18:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
444:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
434:19:58, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
417:14:25, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
384:15:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
338:08:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
62:01:52, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
358:few or no other edits
360:outside this topic.
361:
341:
324:comment added by
314:User:PeteMcGinity
288:
274:
265:
251:
242:
228:
459:
446:
397:reliable sources
382:
343:
340:
318:
275:
252:
229:
196:
184:
183:
169:
117:
99:
44:The result was
34:
467:
466:
462:
461:
460:
458:
457:
456:
455:
449:deletion review
442:
377:
319:
191:
126:
90:
76:Mark Chadbourne
74:
71:
68:Mark Chadbourne
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
465:
463:
454:
453:
437:
436:
419:
389:
388:
387:
386:
380:GorillaWarfare
370:self-published
308:
290:
289:
266:
243:
219:
218:
194:GorillaWarfare
187:
186:
123:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
464:
452:
450:
445:
439:
438:
435:
431:
427:
423:
420:
418:
414:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
391:
390:
385:
381:
375:
371:
367:
364:
363:
362:
359:
355:
351:
347:
339:
335:
331:
327:
323:
315:
312:
309:
307:
303:
299:
295:
292:
291:
287:
283:
279:
272:
267:
264:
260:
256:
249:
244:
241:
237:
233:
226:
221:
220:
217:
213:
209:
205:
202:
201:
200:
199:
195:
182:
178:
175:
172:
168:
164:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
136:
132:
129:
128:Find sources:
124:
121:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
58:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
443:
440:
421:
392:
365:
346:Pete McGinty
342:
326:Pete McGinty
310:
293:
203:
188:
176:
170:
162:
155:
149:
143:
137:
127:
55:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
405:cannot find
356:) has made
320:—Preceding
208:Dragquennom
153:free images
401:Soundclick
296:per nom.
278:• Gene93k
255:• Gene93k
232:• Gene93k
374:WP:MUSIC
354:contribs
334:contribs
322:unsigned
120:View log
426:Bearian
366:Comment
159:WP refs
147:scholar
93:protect
88:history
51:postdlf
422:Delete
393:Delete
294:Delete
204:Delete
131:Google
97:delete
46:DELETE
298:Keb25
174:JSTOR
135:books
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
430:talk
413:talk
409:Whpq
350:talk
330:talk
311:Keep
302:talk
282:talk
259:talk
236:talk
212:talk
167:FENS
141:news
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
57:talk
276:--
253:--
230:--
181:TWL
118:– (
48:.
432:)
415:)
378:–
376:.
352:•
344:—
336:)
332:•
304:)
284:)
273:.
261:)
250:.
238:)
227:.
214:)
192:–
161:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
428:(
411:(
348:(
328:(
300:(
280:(
257:(
234:(
210:(
185:)
177:·
171:·
163:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
138:·
133:(
125:(
122:)
116:)
78:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.