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 Speedy keep (non-admin closure). Ruslik (talk) 11:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Burragubba[edit]

Burragubba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Removed prod, think I should take this one to the people. This article features a wholly non-notable charlatan. Any of his "albums" are furthermore not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia general. I have no idea who this guy is, and more importantly, I don't want to know. Delete. Bilodeauzx (talk) 04:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, secondary coverage exists, in which he is referred to as "A world renowned busker". Also participated in a hunger strike which got press coverage. Meets WP:N easily. In addition, I do not believe that comments like "I have no idea who this guy is, and more importantly, I don't want to know" are helpful. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, but this needs some serious clean-up to make it not read like pure promo material. The hunger strike and 3rd-party converage should get in there. Also, should be merged with Adrian Burragubba, which is inexplicably a separate article. Avram (talk) 06:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This article is currently undergoing a minor edit war, in which a single user is trying to limit the scope of the article to the artist's musical career and exclude sourced information on his political career. Note that articles like this are kept in Wikipedia specifically because they try to include all notable and verifiable aspects of a person's life and career, and they will not act merely as mirrors of publicity material available on other sites. Avram (talk) 17:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. This proposal, and its contempt for Australian Aboriginal people, is unacceptable. The subject is clearly notable and clearly not a charlatan. I agree with Lankiveil about the rest of the nomination. Before nominating a bio for deletion, one should make an serious effort to find out who the subject is. The material in Adrian Burragubba should be merged in, although there seems to be little that is new, and that article made into a redirect. --Bduke (Discussion) 07:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Sufficient secondary sources exist to establish notability. I too am concerned at the terms used in the nomination; refer WP:CIVIL Murtoa (talk) 07:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Seems to pass WP:N test. As stated above Burragubba needs to merge with Adrian Burragubba.--Takver (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, sources confirm notability. WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:IDONTKNOWIT are not grounds for deletion. Huon (talk) 14:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep Page has been edited. We are wondering who Bilodeauzx is, and if he is an expert on Aboriginal performers. Adrian Burragubba has been publicly performing for over 20 years and is personally known by every notable didgeridoo player (meaning Aboriginal) in Australia and is now recognised as an elder in Brisbane. If you have a problem with authenticity please email info@burragubba.com Itwasagoodyear (talk) 14:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Nominator's rationale is based off WP:IDONTKNOWIT. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Thank you to Lankiviel for locating the secondary sources, which I added to the article yesterday. There is sufficient coverage of Burragubba (mostly for his politics) to narrowly meet the biography notability criteria - the school page is a little weak but the ABC and AAP stories are genuine secondary sources. I appreciate these weren't in the article at the time of the AfD nomination, and trust the nominator's concern is now addressed. Euryalus (talk) 22:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep this nom seems to have been made in bad faith. X Marx the Spot (talk) 22:59, 22 September 2008 (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.