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 keep. Closing as keep after sources were found and added to the article. (non-admin closure) — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 02:10, 8 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Ronnie Bird

Ronnie Bird (  | 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. WP:BEFORE shows no evidence of reliable sources available online: would be curious to see if any newspaper archives have anything additional. Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 22:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 22:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 22:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 22:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom -- Devokewater @ 23:25, 23 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• comment article at our French counterpart has sources. https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Bird DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 23:48, 23 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment I've added book and periodical sources from Google Books and linked the French Wikipedia article. Now going off the Googles. I can't imagine that the eight most popular male singer in France, who released many albums in a short career and who was with Decca wouldn't have significant coverage, but I'll have to reach out to someone with access to British newspaper access to get a better idea. It's almost certainly a keep, but I'll wait to vote until I can align it with rationale. If people would refrain from voting for a day or two until I've finished the research, that would be prudent. Thanks. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 14:05, 24 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete without prejudice toward changing my vote if DiamondRemley can find better sourcing. However, I read through the article and cannot find any claims that would establish notability, and the sources are at best mentions. For example, the source relating to Chuck Berry states "Chuck Berry is cur- rently making a town tour of France with a package that features Ronnie Bird and the new folk singer Antoine." That's just not good enough - it's a passing mention, and touring with someone does not create notability. The fact that the claims for notability are that he was voted the eighth most popular French male singer and hosted a radio show once in the 60s is just evidence, in my view, that he is not notable. When an editor clearly attempted to find any sources related to an individual and still failed to come up with anything but passing mentions, it shows that there are unlikely to be any good sources available. Being mentioned in numerous places at numerous times does not pass GNG or establish significance. Again, if someone can show me something which would establish notability with more than passing mentions, I'm open to changing my vote. But right now, delete, easily. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 15:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC) reply

I have tried and failed? Your vote and comment is disappointing. I do research one database at a time. I am not finished. Where is your patience? I asked people to refrain from voting; I have not voted myself yet. I don't just look for significant coverage; I improve articles as I go. I know some people like to phone it in. That's not me. I am as thorough as I can be. FWIW, these brief mentions are from valid sources and give an idea as to his career activity, showing he was performing with English language performers in his own country. Why criticize the relevant? Billboard is based thousands of miles and a language away from that of Bird's base and indicate international attention at a time when British and American bands dominated. I have not said that was enough. I don't read French, I would have rotten luck getting ahold of a librarian or music expert in France to help me, but I know enough to guess that when I Google someone and get a bunch of Decca album covers, and when French Wikipedia has a better article with a more complete discography, it's likely they are notable. By the way, the 1992 article is hardly a passing mention. I'll be working on this for days. Now off to my French class. Adieu. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 16:45, 24 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Please don't take my vote personally. My only point is that someone did perform an in-depth search for sources already, and the current sources are lacking. I stated I would change my vote if and when sources are found - I have no obligation to wait to vote. I think my statement should speak for itself. Cheers. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 16:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Very well on not taking things personally, and of course you don't have to wait to vote. AfD discussions get long when we go back and forth on every little point, so I won't expand on some of your points that I could except to express that no in-depth search has been conducted. A search isn't in-depth unless it is conducted where the exonerating evidence of notability is likely to be. What's been conducted on the part of the nominator is probably the minimum required of WP:BEFORE (which we've discussed elsewhere and which is not a slam). What's been conducted by me is everything I can think of at the moment and it falls short of what a thorough search is. Until someone looks at French sources for this era, it's a search in the shallow ponds of Google and the information lakes available on the open internet. I find notes on Bird's recordings reported in Billboard indicate he must have received more significant coverage in his home country. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 19:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment I've requested someone to look into it at the British newspaper archive. If I don't hear back in a few days, I will seek alternatives. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 19:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep as meets WP:GNG. Sources I added to further reading were cited on the French Wikipedia page; these and what's in the article now indicate the subject meets WP:GNG. Beyond that, I also think Bird's appearances in the US trade publication Billboard has a traces of WP:NEXIST. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 20:37, 25 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment Cardiffbear88 probably doesn't love constructive criticism, but I must point out that in this case they did not complete WP:BEFORE, B. Carry Out These Checks, #7 Check for interlanguage links. Had they done so, they would have seen that the French Wikipedia article was more developed and other sources, including but not only a book with the subject's name in the title. If Cardiffbear88 did complete B #7, they didn't take the French Wikipedia's article's content into account when making the nomination. I suspect the former because the nomination statement reads, in part, "no evidence of reliable sources available online". This is untrue and I think perhaps the nominator left out "significant coverage" or something from the statement. In my exploration of Google Books alone, I found reliable secondary sources. I've looked into this book with Bird's name in the title more closely and it looks to be a good secondary source. I'll keep working on the article as I can, but AfD is not for cleanup or rewrite. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 20:37, 25 July 2020 (UTC) reply

• DiamondRemley39 it’s almost like you wrote that comment specifically looking for an argument - please can we stick to the merits of the article rather than attacking me. I completed WP:BEFORE to the best of my ability - I did take into account the French version and its referencing is also very poor. The article is much improved now - thank you - but I would point out that it has been unsourced for several years, and whilst the sources you’ve added are reliable, the ones that I can access are passing mentions and do not constitute significant coverage. Editors may believe that offline sources make the subject notable - but these are not covered in WP:BEFORE. Please assume good faith as per WP:AGF. Cardiffbear88 ( talk) 07:26, 26 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Never did I imply you edit in bad faith; be careful that you do not imply that I write in it here ("looking for an argument"... It's AfD.). Read about good faith. It's the quality of the nomination that is an issue, not questionable motives, which is what bad faith is. You wrote " WP:BEFORE shows no evidence of reliable sources available online" but remember that "sources do not have to be available online or written in English". You say you did see the French Wikipedia article's sourcing and remarked that its referencing is poor, and I don't know what to do with that statement because I was able to look up the books and publishers and they're legit and it's not like they have to meet a notability standard, only reliability, and by "poor referencing" I think you refer to a lack of online citations and not enough citations. But the sources were on the article and you prodded ours. The nomination statement is not entirely accurate; you did see indication of sourcing. If you see sourcing you don't understand or that isn't enough, just say it in the nom. :::You not only nominated this for deletion, but you previously prodded it as an uncontroversial deletion, and then in this nomination you are open to there being coverage in newspapers and you apparently saw the books listed in the French article by then, so that was a poor prod.

There is going to be some heat around it when researchers sit down to clean up someone else's shoddy work from years past, to spend a few hours researching something nominated, if we find sourcing on the internet and not behind a paywall. Yeah, we're probably going to say something. Add it to the article or mention it in the discussion, telling us specifically what you find and why it falls short, and we can't fuss over that. If you take a few minutes to add those sources to the article, adjust tags as necessary, nominate then, there's a lot less we can say. You don't have to... But add nothing to the article except the AfD and you'll hear about it, especially if they see that notability is likely and the article only needs clean up.

Thank you for acknowledging the work done; you often do that and it is more than most do. You say in the nomination statement that newspaper archives may have more. If you want to reach out to someone like me, in advance of prodding and nominating, similar to what we did with William Holmes recently, I'd be open to something like that. Peace. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 11:48, 26 July 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment Bird is on the cover of at least three issues of Jukebox Magazine. I added those to a Further reading section. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 22:29, 27 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep as well as the French sources such as reliable book sources, and Billboard refs, also found an AllMusic staff written bio here and the article is being currently improved so that it should be included in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk) 23:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:MILL - a cover band musician who toured for five years and gave up. Bearian ( talk) 15:22, 30 July 2020 (UTC) reply

I'll add more of his discography to show he was more than a cover musician. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 23:07, 30 July 2020 (UTC) [belated signing] reply

He made a comeback with a new album in 1992 and later releases and became a songwriter for other artists in the 198Os so he is more than a cover musician of 5 years, imv Atlantic306 ( talk) 23:01, 30 July 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment to the closer FYI I'm attempting to get access to information outside of my country. I hope to know whether someone will be able to do look ups for me in a few days. This is a dark information time with interlibrary loan being shut down in many locations, including mine. Thank you. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 15:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC) reply

I have now seen all I can reasonably expect to get in 2020. Thank you. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 22:47, 30 July 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep - clearly meets GNG. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:23, 31 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep per the new sources added. — Toughpigs ( talk) 15:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep now has more sources -- Devokewater @ 16:06, 31 July 2020 (UTC) reply
• Is there something wrong with the publisher Camion Blanc? I'm rather surprised that people have been scrabbling around for news sources about the subject when there was a 186-page biography cited in the French article before this was even nominated for deletion ( ISBN  9782357799592). Phil Bridger ( talk) 16:07, 31 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Phil Bridger, that was discussed some above. The French sources were seen but not taken into account when the article was nominated. The searched elsewhere to improve the article as I could. And no, I don't think there is anything wrong with that publisher. DiamondRemley39 ( talk) 17:54, 31 July 2020 (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.