Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ace and Vis

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 no consensus defaulting to keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ace and Vis

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I found no notability for this duo. SL93 (talk) 23:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. bd2412 T 01:29, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:26, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:26, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:26, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As a duo they were at their most prominent during British pop's apartheid years, which no doubt will hinder sourcing from the "liberal" press, but this nomination smacks of Wikipedia's usual new-establishment double standards. RobinCarmody (talk) 21:13, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- What double standards? I would question notability for an article like this either way. SL93 (talk) 21:28, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Satisifies WP:ANYBIO "a well-known and significant award or honor" i.e. the Radio Academy Award their show received in 2004, and we describe the Radio Academy Awards as "the most prestigious awards in the British radio industry". Also coverage to satisfy WP:GNG e.g. 1, 2.----Pontificalibus 11:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - of the five references, one is to their BBC listing (where they worked), one is to Myspace (!), and one is to a book in which they are not mentioned. That leaves two refs to voice-online and peterboroughtoday (Peterborough Telegraph), neither of which are major sources - the mention is the Peterborough Telegraph is an announcement of a live broadcast - so they have not "received significant coverage in reliable sources" as per WP:GNG - their one award is not a major award as defined by WP:MUSICBIO (Grammy, Juno, etc.) - all in all, they do not meet the notability guidelines; therefore, delete - Epinoia (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is a whole section about them in the book, pages 96-98, in which their style of presenting on the radio is cited as an example, and their cultural identity and sociability are discussed. The Voice (British newspaper) is certainly a reliable source, and that article obviously constitutes significant coverage. These two are enough to pass WP:GNG. As to WP:MUSICBIO, that concerns musicians, not broadcast media presenters.----Pontificalibus 06:02, 18 August 2019 (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.

Ace and Vis

zproxy.org