Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Schoenberg

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. No support for deletion of the article including nominator. Capitalistroadster 05:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eric Schoenberg

• Keep. First of all, what makes it not notable according to WP:MUSIC? You HAVE to point it out when nominating articles for deletion. Second of all, before nominating musical artist/bands article for deletion, try to perform a search in AllMusicGuide to see if they have a page for the person. If they do, then the person is likely to be notable enough for here. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 01:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Calm down :) I saved this from speedy deletion. Convince the users who tagged it for speedy, not me. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-11-13 02:01Z
• Keep. His albums on the notable labels Folkways and Rounder Records are proof of notability. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 01:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, but this needs reliable sources. A good illustration why the creator of an article is well-advised to either add sources, or suggest some on the talk page. Robert A.West (Talk) 02:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Chubbles1212 02:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Not a good openning for notability - "is an American guitarist and owned of a guitar store." But per above, satisfies WP:MUSIC. --Oakshade 02:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I originally tagged the article for speedy deletion, and it reads a lot better now. eaolson 02:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment, a slightly modified copyvio is still a copyvio. In this case, the article is extremely similar to http://www.om28.com/abouteric.html , so similar you could dismiss the differences. -- ReyBrujo 02:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Not a copyvio any more. I edited the article so that it wouldn't be a copyvioo. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Good work. I would have preferred to delete all copyvio revisions leaving only your version, but it is better than before. -- ReyBrujo 04:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, although it still could use sources. SkierRMH 02:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, meets WP:MUSIC criteria, though sources should be added. Terence Ong _{(C | R)} 04:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

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.