- 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. slakr\ talk / 02:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- DJ Layla (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)
I don't see any particular indication of notability, as defined by WP:MUSICBIO or WP:BIO. As of now, our "sources" are a blog post and some cruft, which hardly count as the "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself" demanded by the relevant guidelines. - Biruitorul Talk 21:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Moldova-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Charting on a national chart passes WP:MUSIC GuzzyG (talk) 03:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree: WP:NMUSIC is a guideline; it says right in the introduction that someone meeting the criteria "may be notable". Now, if we had "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and independent of the musician", that would make the subject notable, especially when combined with the charted song. But given that all we have are scraps of trivia, and that the single evidence for charting we have is this, the very essence of cruft — well, that's a pretty thin reed on which to hang a claim of notability. So thin, I would say, that it snaps under any sort of scrutiny. Given that no reliable sources have bothered to cover the subject in any sort of depth, there really isn't any reason for us to do so. - Biruitorul Talk 02:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Esquivalience t 23:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Is not completely true what Biruitorul is saying. The evidence for charting is given also by this article on a romanian newspaper and this on a moldovan newspaper. Also if you do some search on the internet you can see that this single has a good impact even in occidental europe like you can see on this award. --Paul Gascoigne (talk) 07:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Passing mention in a local newspaper, a blog post on the site of a tabloid, and a bit of cruft are hardly at the level of sourcing expected for a singer of encyclopedic caliber. - Biruitorul Talk 13:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Biruitorul, I guess that in your opinion only Mozart or Elvis are "of encyclopedic caliber". I doubt that DJ Layla is less notable than other DJs from Category:DJs. She is mentioned by many sources, including http://www.mtv.ro/video/interviu/interviu-cu-dj-layla-si-alissa-la-galeria-115.html, ProTV Chișinău ([2]) or bestmusic.ro (6th music site in Romania, with 45,000 unique visitors/week). 217.31.41.8 (talk) 07:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Taking part in a softball "interview" on MTV is not an indication of notability; neither is routine coverage (about the subject's marriage, or a show, or other news items of passing interest). - Biruitorul Talk 13:43, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- So here is another source that I hope is enough. An award for the most airplayed song on Radio România Actualităţi, which is one of the major radio in Romania. –Paul Gascoigne (talk) 08:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this. That is not an independent source - it's on the site of the station that handed out the award - and the lack of substantive coverage ("multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician") continues to be an issue. - Biruitorul Talk 15:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep (Changed from Comment, see below) The source for the chart positions (top40-charts.com) is listed at Wikipedia:Record charts#Websites to avoid. The prize awarded by the radio station as their most played song might pass WP:MUSBIO #11. At the Euro Dance Web award the song ended up at #7. To pass WP:MUSBIO #2, it would need a better source for End-Year Chart 2009 (Romania). The current source has a text about the chart and mentions the song (in last position), but no listing. Most of the info (like peak position) is not in the source. Kraxler (talk) 16:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Is not that easy to find better sources on the internet for Romanian top charts. But anyway, here is another source which is already used widely on en.wikipedia as a source for Romanian Top 100. Here you can see that this song was actually on the romanian charts for quite a long number of weeks and peaked at number 2. Hope that now the page can be considered enciclopedic. (unlogged Paul Gascoigne) –82.41.253.166 (talk) 08:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Although that is a blog, I deem it reliable. Under the circumstances (no official Romanian single chart anymore), this seems to be a true archive of the charts as published at the time when they were official. The musician passes WP:MUSBIO #2, notability has been established. It would be nice, though, to find and add some sources with more info about DJ Layla herself. Kraxler (talk) 12:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: She is notable, though article needs serious improvement, as do the articles of many other eastern European artists.--Milowent • hasspoken 04:54, 27 May 2015 (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.