278:—Well everyone I think the article should be left up. It looks great for one when you compare it to most articles on here that no one seems to mention. He is a NYS legend, he just played with Stevie Wonder 3 weeks ago in California- I watched about 10 different videos on Youtube of this that I could find (pretty impressive too actually). Just because a musician is not signed to a record label does not mean he is not worthy enough. I found that this artist has songs published through "Could Be Entertainment" and "Crucial Music" which is now the equivalent of a record label considering labels only sign musicians that suck (Nicki Minaj for example...). Everything is referenced and could probably be a little tighter there, but now a days this is how things work for musicians. He has... what does it say- 13 companies endorsing him? So I believe that it should be left alone and lets just make suggestions to the editor to tighten the article up.
249:
external links were added alongside the footnotes none of which even mention Hayes. According to the article, a few companies endorsed the artist, but that does not necessarily establish notability. Who knows though, maybe one day this guy'll be a huge rock sensation, perhaps part of some band; he's
282:
Mick Hayes is an up and coming musician that is now playing all over the country with plenty of companies behind him- those companies do NOT affiliate themselves with just anyone. We should be encouraging musicians like this as I'm afraid there are less and less in the world. Also- sorry I did not
192:
This guy is a pretty decent guitar player (check out some YouTube videos). But the article is really not good: it's practically a promotional piece even after I did a bit of pruning. And I don't think he's notable by our standards--there is no record label, no notable shows, etc. There's some
441:—Someone that has played on stage with Stevie Wonder in the prime spot at the worlds largest music trade show (NAMM) is by no means a 'garage band'. All of his endorsers have pages for him on their websites- he's amongst some of the finest musicians on their websites
161:
327:
217:
114:
155:
307:
121:
87:
82:
91:
473:
and an unsuitable source to establish any notability. Ask yourself this - if he really is that good, why has he had no chart success, and why have
74:
176:
451:
290:
143:
17:
193:
coverage in GNews but it's all from the
Buffalo newspapers, and I don't think it rises to the level of notability by our standards.
487:
431:
371:
137:
230:
510:
40:
133:
489:
459:
433:
401:
376:
339:
319:
298:
268:
234:
202:
56:
183:
78:
455:
294:
251:
447:
286:
70:
62:
506:
36:
213:
149:
417:. Regarding 76.180.50.53's comment about him being "an up and coming musician" - that just means it's
485:
429:
470:
418:
366:
169:
414:
350:
421:- when he's got some chart success or major national news coverage, he can have an article then.
409:. I had a good look round but couldn't find any news or book hits, and not much web hits beyond
335:
315:
226:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
505:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
397:
198:
389:
478:
422:
442:
413:, whose reliability I would question anyway. The list of endorsements is straight out of
410:
361:
246:
474:
331:
311:
221:
108:
393:
388:. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject per
194:
53:
353:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
469:
That source is affiliated with the article's subject, which means it is a
499:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
245:—lack of good quality source coverage. Additionally, three
218:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Log/2013 February 14
328:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
104:
100:
96:
168:
360:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
212:
This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (
182:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
513:). No further edits should be made to this page.
283:sign in to write this I'm on a work computer.
308:list of New York-related deletion discussions
8:
326:Note: This debate has been included in the
306:Note: This debate has been included in the
325:
305:
250:got some talent. But right now, no. —
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
444:Keep the page this guy has it.
1:
490:14:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
460:02:20, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
434:17:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
402:04:26, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
377:00:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
340:15:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
320:15:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
299:18:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
269:13:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
235:11:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
216:). I have transcluded it to
203:04:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
419:too soon to have an article
530:
477:never written about him?
57:04:57, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
502:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
71:Mick Hayes (musician)
63:Mick Hayes (musician)
210:Automated comment:
48:The result was
450:comment added by
379:
342:
322:
289:comment added by
237:
521:
504:
483:
462:
427:
374:
369:
364:
359:
355:
301:
263:
262:
224:
208:
187:
186:
172:
124:
112:
94:
34:
529:
528:
524:
523:
522:
520:
519:
518:
517:
511:deletion review
500:
479:
445:
423:
372:
367:
362:
348:
284:
258:
257:
252:
222:
129:
120:
85:
69:
66:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
527:
525:
516:
515:
495:
494:
493:
492:
471:primary source
464:
463:
436:
404:
382:
381:
380:
357:
356:
345:
344:
343:
323:
280:
279:
272:
271:
253:
247:Premier Guitar
239:
238:
190:
189:
126:
65:
60:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
526:
514:
512:
508:
503:
497:
496:
491:
488:
486:
484:
482:
476:
475:Rolling Stone
472:
468:
467:
466:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
443:
440:
437:
435:
432:
430:
428:
426:
420:
416:
412:
408:
405:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
384:
383:
378:
375:
370:
365:
358:
354:
352:
347:
346:
341:
337:
333:
329:
324:
321:
317:
313:
309:
304:
303:
302:
300:
296:
292:
288:
277:
274:
273:
270:
267:
264:
261:
256:
248:
244:
241:
240:
236:
232:
228:
225:
219:
215:
211:
207:
206:
205:
204:
200:
196:
185:
181:
178:
175:
171:
167:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
135:
132:
131:Find sources:
127:
123:
119:
116:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
501:
498:
480:
452:76.180.50.53
446:— Preceding
438:
424:
406:
385:
349:
291:76.180.50.53
285:— Preceding
281:
275:
265:
259:
254:
242:
209:
191:
179:
173:
165:
158:
152:
146:
140:
130:
117:
49:
47:
31:
28:
156:free images
481:Ritchie333
425:Ritchie333
507:talk page
415:WP:GARAGE
332:• Gene93k
312:• Gene93k
37:talk page
509:or in a
448:unsigned
351:Relisted
287:unsigned
115:View log
39:or in a
260:PENGUIN
223:Snotbot
162:WP refs
150:scholar
88:protect
83:history
407:Delete
394:Pburka
390:WP:GNG
386:Delete
243:Delete
214:step 3
195:Drmies
134:Google
92:delete
54:Secret
50:delete
177:JSTOR
138:books
122:Stats
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
456:talk
439:Keep
411:this
398:talk
368:tion
363:Vaca
336:talk
316:talk
295:talk
276:Keep
199:talk
170:FENS
144:news
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
255:WP:
233:»
220:.
184:TWL
113:– (
458:)
400:)
392:.
338:)
330:.
318:)
310:.
297:)
229:•
201:)
164:)
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
52:.
454:(
396:(
373:9
334:(
314:(
293:(
266:·
231:c
227:t
197:(
188:)
180:·
174:·
166:·
159:·
153:·
147:·
141:·
136:(
128:(
125:)
118:·
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.