Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blush Response (2nd nomination)

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 delete. ✗plicit 03:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blush Response

Blush Response (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced promotional page for a Bandcamp artist. Skyerise (talk) 16:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: article was created by Synthesizeme (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), whose sole edit outside the article was to identify himself as the subject on his user page.
• Comment Some coverage in a German magazine [1] and in DJ Mag and the like, unsure if they're RS. He seems to get some, but not much, coverage in the various electro/dj/his type of music press. I'm not sure what his musical style is to be honest. Oaktree b (talk) 18:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Germany, and New York. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The DJ Mag piece is this one and includes an interview with Blush, which would then fall foul of the exclusion criteria in point 1 of
  WP:NMUSIC criteria, and have not uncovered any other sources myself. If others find additional sources I'd be happy to reconsider my !vote. WJ94 (talk) 11:50, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 02:33, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:13, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Looks like it's not meeting criteria, as only one source might be acceptable. Oaktree b (talk) 14:54, 30 March 2023 (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.