Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juventa

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. If some substantial, relaible, and independent coverage of this person's work surfaces in the future, then the article can be re-created. But it hasn't been shown in this discussion that such coverage exists yet. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:25, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Juventa

Juventa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable musician. Fails

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 12:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 12:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 12:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: After searching for RSes, this appears to have no coverage at all. KGirlTrucker81 ^{huh? what I've been doing} 13:48, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP - It was revealed officially today on the major magazine
  talk) 17:56, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Comment - Even if your last sentence is true, it's still considered

WP:CRYSTAL. The article is about Juventa, not KUURO or any of his other aliases. Significant reliable independent sources about this topic Juventa, are difficult to locate and it doesn't seem to meet the criteria for musicians. - TheMagnificentist 18:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Comment - I will try add to the article existing, independent sources on Post's work with KUURO, since that group has received some coverage for many months before it was revealed that Post is one of its two members.

talk) 18:58, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete per
  sufficiently significant coverage. Bearian (talk) 13:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Comment - Are articles from the website YourEDM not considered significant coverage? Also, the article was not merely a "short notice" of Post, since Post makes up half of the group that the entire Bilboard article was discussing, and the purpose of the article was not only to officially reveal KUURO's identities but to premiere their latest release.
    talk) 19:58, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment
    talk) 20:28, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • (YouTube, Soundcloud aren't reliable and Above & Beyond's website might be considered self-published/primary) The newly added sources don't even mention Juventa (except one). The article is about Juventa not KUURO. If it was about KUURO then I guess it could survive deletion. I would recommend renamng the page to KUURO (after the deletion discussion concluded), then maybe add Juventa as an alias. - TheMagnificentist 05:37, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• delete Just doesn't meet GNG. Lot's of inadequate sources. The BillBoard is disappointing. and this is why
  WP:OUTCOMES. Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete GNG not met. Remixes of notable songs don't make the remixer notable unless the remixes themselves were released & charted. Exemplo347 (talk) 19:55, 2 June 2017 (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.