633:: The article is somehow contradictorious: it states Veronica Ballestrini is a songwriter, but then bases her notability in a song she didn't wrote. Wouldn't be logical to also show one of her own creations? But the article doesn't mention anything outside that single that she didn't even wrote, so, according to the article, a she's just a cover-singer... Sounds like autopromotion, sincerely. Apart from that, she is only 15/16 years old (born in 1991) and we've got a photo of her; that may be unsuitable (or maybe even illegal) in some countries without her parents' consent... --
339:
charts! It didn't sell well. Our comment on
Ballestrini is neither trival, nor spurious. It is a genuinely held opinion of one of our reviewers, a guy who has been producing, recording and publishing Country music for more than 34 years. He's an industry expert and I'd say his opinion is anything BUT trivial. Now, tell us what the weather's going to be like tomorrow!
229:
Knowledge criterion for NOTABILITY is charting in a major national chart, we strongly suggest you check out Music Row's
Country charts for the last six months. Ballestrina (an appalling artist with an appalling debut single,) meets that criterion. John D Lewis, for and on behalf of Dawn Lewis, owner, Coquet-Shack.com. {
207:- personal opinions when stated as opinions and clearly not stated as fact are not subject to libel laws regardless of the media they are published on. I gather the US is rather protective of its citizens' rights to free speech and doesn't look kindly on people who try to put that down with empty threats.--
338:
And
Cricket02Â : You shopuld get your head round reality before mouthing off like that. NO-ONE can know, before a single is released for sale to the public, whether it WILL DEFINTELY sell well or not. Take Garth Brook's last single. One of the biggest names in Country music and it didn't even make the
182:
Coquet-Shack is a completely independent web site. It has no affiliations with ANY music label or artist. It is regarded by the
Country Music Industry as an honest (sometimes too honest) reviews web site. We can produce dozens of e-mails to prove that point. So, Ten Pound Hammer, beware impugning our
228:
As to the
Ballestrini entry: Hey, bin it. The we can all be absolutely certain that Knowledge is just another MySpace, a quasi-user based site which is in fact, a publicity machine for the big labels who NEVER sign new artists before they've been tried out on smaller independent labels. And since a
268:, albeit reliable, is trivial at best, and says: "If the single sells, her career will take off.", so it is not even known yet if the single will even sell. Again, wait and see how this artist does, and bring back at a later time.
646:
Strange though how a person trying to carve themselves a name as a singer/songwriter chooses to do so by not using her own material. I wonder if she was advised not to do so. If so I wonder why? --
434:
I think that the article is possibly salvagable. An artist signed to a label with notable artists and having referenced, reliable independent sources, while not a household name, may be notable.
512:
672:
This is all completely irrelevant and childish to this discussion on whether this artist is notable for inclusion, based on guidelines alone, and not opinion, and should end here.
114:
377:
I most certainly hope that she does do well and wish her every success. Until then, her notability is not yet established for inclusion in this encyclopedia per
410:
The label doesn't look notable to me - it was started last year. The tour is a radio tour - what's a radio tour, just interviews? No other sign of notability.
609:
with regards to notability. One new user has created this article and the article for the label for the sole purpose of self-promotion/advertising. (
142:
This may be borderline but she is signed with a notable label and is on tour albeit a promotional one. However the article is sourced. Keep for now. --
87:
82:
125:. The article's creator has constantly removed any and all CSD and notability template tags in spite of several warnings. Has also contravened the
566:
230:
184:
91:
183:
reputation or face legal action against yourself and this web site. John D Lewis, for and on behalf of Dawn Lewis, owner, Coquet-Shack.com. (
74:
254:
has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.
614:
610:
578:
555:
17:
472:
has been shown to be a sockpuppet of a user who has been stalking me and making numerous bad faith AFDs against my articles--
354:
242:
196:
265:
693:
676:
659:
650:
637:
625:
591:
527:
502:
476:
461:
446:
438:
426:
414:
402:
389:
370:
322:
272:
259:
211:
171:
155:
133:
56:
706:
78:
36:
248:
One single does not constitute notabiity. Suggest bringing the article back when notability is established per
705:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
536:
I think this is a good article, and will become more reliable with more sources soon. Veronica is climbing the
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
574:
551:
685:
You should know that AfD discussions should be based on guidelines/policies more than opinions. Look at
570:
547:
496:
to boot. Her website isn't one. Seems like possible promotional here. I did speedy the article before.
411:
423:
543:
342:
70:
62:
346:
234:
188:
165:
497:
129:
rule several times. I've nominated this AFD for notability and also to stop an edit war occurring
350:
238:
192:
522:
500:
398:
The label itself is further down today's list for AFD, it doesn't have any notability either.
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
647:
606:
588:
489:
473:
458:
399:
382:
367:
319:
249:
208:
149:
130:
122:
49:
673:
622:
618:
386:
366:
It will be either wet or dry, does that mean I have a career ahead of me if correct? --
269:
256:
164:
Only one of the sources is independent, and I'm not sure how reliable Coquet Shack is.
690:
656:
634:
378:
126:
686:
519:
493:
469:
443:
435:
53:
108:
587:
This anonymous user is actually the creator of the article under discussion. --
318:...and possibly another couple of user names too. See talk page for details. --
143:
453:
Because that was the way I chose to word it, you would have chosen your way,
537:
52:. No objection to recreation as and when the subject does become notable.
295:
WHOA BOYS! Shackman DID sign the entries above: Shackman is JOHN D LEWIS.
540:
chart. Keep for now, wait it out and you will see. 27 August 2007 (UTC)
699:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
264:
Additional note: The one independent source/review provided,
605:. This artist has released one single, completely fails
581:) (sole contributions have been to articles in question)
121:
Non-notable musician who doesn't meet anything close to
104:
100:
96:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
709:). No further edits should be made to this page.
513:list of Bands and musicians-related deletions
8:
48:. Insufficient independant sources to meet
511:: This debate has been included in the
655:(Reply to Bob1) Yes, you're right. --
7:
615:Special:Contributions/75.2.209.103
611:Special:Contributions/ChelseaBurns
250:Knowledge guidelines for inclusion
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
357:) 06:43, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
1:
694:10:16, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
57:18:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
677:16:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
660:13:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
651:16:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
638:10:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
626:03:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
592:14:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
528:14:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
503:14:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
477:21:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
462:14:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
447:12:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
439:12:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
427:00:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
415:22:16, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
403:22:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
390:09:03, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
371:14:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
323:16:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
273:07:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
260:07:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
212:10:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
172:21:41, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
156:21:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
134:21:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
726:
432:Possible KEEP/Weak DELETE.
702:Please do not modify it.
585:Comment for perspective:
32:Please do not modify it.
558:) 03:07, 28 August 2007
467:Comment for perspective
617:) and should refer to
619:What Knowledge is not
569:comment was added by
233:comment was added by
187:comment was added by
687:WP's Deletion policy
71:Veronica Ballestrini
63:Veronica Ballestrini
691:Neigel von Teighen
657:Neigel von Teighen
635:Neigel von Teighen
455:vive le difference
559:
546:comment added by
530:
516:
358:
345:comment added by
717:
704:
643:
642:
541:
525:
517:
507:
494:Reliable sources
340:
266:coquet-shack.com
168:
167:Ten Pound Hammer
112:
94:
34:
725:
724:
720:
719:
718:
716:
715:
714:
713:
707:deletion review
700:
523:
488:per nom, fails
166:
154:
85:
69:
66:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
723:
721:
712:
711:
696:
683:
682:
681:
680:
679:
665:
664:
663:
662:
653:
640:
628:
599:
598:
597:
596:
595:
594:
561:
560:
531:
505:
482:
481:
480:
479:
450:
449:
441:
429:
417:
405:
395:
394:
393:
392:
375:
374:
373:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
328:
327:
326:
325:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
300:
299:
298:
297:
296:
284:
283:
282:
281:
280:
279:
278:
277:
276:
275:
221:
220:
219:
218:
217:
216:
215:
214:
177:
176:
175:
174:
159:
158:
148:
119:
118:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
722:
710:
708:
703:
697:
695:
692:
688:
684:
678:
675:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
661:
658:
654:
652:
649:
645:
644:
641:
639:
636:
632:
629:
627:
624:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
603:Strong Delete
601:
600:
593:
590:
586:
583:
582:
580:
576:
572:
568:
565:
564:
563:
562:
557:
553:
549:
545:
539:
535:
532:
529:
526:
521:
514:
510:
506:
504:
501:
499:
495:
491:
487:
484:
483:
478:
475:
471:
468:
465:
464:
463:
460:
456:
452:
451:
448:
445:
442:
440:
437:
433:
430:
428:
425:
421:
418:
416:
413:
409:
406:
404:
401:
397:
396:
391:
388:
384:
380:
376:
372:
369:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
360:
359:
356:
352:
348:
344:
324:
321:
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
307:
306:
294:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
274:
271:
267:
263:
262:
261:
258:
255:
251:
247:
246:
244:
240:
236:
232:
227:
226:
225:
224:
223:
222:
213:
210:
206:
203:
202:
201:
200:
198:
194:
190:
186:
181:
180:
179:
178:
173:
169:
163:
162:
161:
160:
157:
153:
152:
151:yak, yak, yak
147:
146:
141:
138:
137:
136:
135:
132:
128:
124:
116:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
701:
698:
630:
602:
584:
571:75.2.209.103
548:75.2.209.103
533:
508:
485:
466:
454:
431:
422:per above.--
419:
412:MarkinBoston
407:
337:
253:
204:
150:
144:
139:
120:
45:
43:
31:
28:
674:♫ Cricket02
623:♫ Cricket02
542:—Preceding
424:Hooperbloob
387:♫ Cricket02
341:—Preceding
270:♫ Cricket02
257:♫ Cricket02
648:WebHamster
589:WebHamster
474:WebHamster
459:WebHamster
400:WebHamster
368:WebHamster
320:WebHamster
209:WebHamster
131:WebHamster
538:Music Row
607:WP:Music
579:contribs
567:unsigned
556:contribs
544:unsigned
490:WP:MUSIC
383:WP:Music
355:contribs
347:Shackman
343:unsigned
243:contribs
235:Shackman
231:unsigned
197:contribs
189:Shackman
185:unsigned
123:WP:MUSIC
115:View log
50:WP:MUSIC
520:the wub
498:Jaranda
492:and no
470:BaldDee
444:BaldDee
436:BaldDee
88:protect
83:history
54:Spartaz
631:Delete
486:Delete
420:Delete
408:Delete
379:WP:BIO
127:WP:3RR
92:delete
46:Delete
145:JodyB
140:Keep.
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
689:. --
613:and
575:talk
552:talk
534:Keep
524:"?!"
509:Note
381:and
351:talk
252:and
239:talk
193:talk
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
621:.
518:--
515:.
385:.
245:))
205:FYI
199:))
170:•
113:– (
554:•
457:.
353:•
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
577:•
573:(
550:(
349:(
241:•
237:(
195:•
191:(
117:)
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.