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. Tone 15:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Calarco[edit]

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

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

Non-notable musician. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. Local coverage only. Fails WP:SIGCOV. No fans, no social media. scope_creep^Talk 07:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 09:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 09:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration.

• Keep The musician toured nationally with Tori Amos and was a longtime member of the Willy Porter band and Greg Koch and the tone Controls. He recorded with Daryl Stuermer. He wrote several songs for the highly acclaimed Dog Eared Dream album passing WP:CREATIVE#3. WP:NMUSICIAN#1 is passed with non-trivial coverage. OnMilwaukee Magazine 1, 2 the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 3 and The Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph[1] The musician passes WP:N with the coverage and the sourcing is more than WP:BARE Wm335td (talk) 21:27, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. That may be the case that he toured nationally, but the coverage is very hyper-local and is insufficient to pass WP:SIGCOV and that is consensus. I did an Afd for a Seattle singer recently with similar arguments, supposedly notable but it was very-local coverage. I think to pass, it need more geographically diverse coverage. scope_creep^Talk 19:25, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

scope_creep the artist has several non-trivial features. Not really hyper-local- Milwaukee Metro area is 1.5 million. Our notability guide does not distinguish between regional or national- it states reliable sources. So are the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Milwaukee magazine, Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph reliable? If the answer is yes- the coverage is reliable and not trivial. Wm335td (talk) 12:43, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Madison looks to be home town, with some additional coverage 50-60 miles up the road, at Milwaukee. It is insufficient to establish notability, per consensus. scope_creep^Talk 19:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - This is an unfortunate case and we have seen this kind of thing before with "journeyman" musicians who have worked with many notable people but are not quite notable themselves. Calarco has some local coverage in his own right (Wisconsin music weeklies), but most of his media mentions are brief listings as being present in shows or recordings by the people he backed up. So he is a few steps away from notability in his own right. There is no problem with discussing his contributions to other musicians' works at their articles. ––DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 01:31, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @Wm335td: 1.5 million people just confirms it is a local city band, it hasn't got country-wide coverage. I would read WP:THREAD. New comments move from the top to the bottom. Otherwise it would make it very hard to read. scope_creep^Talk 15:14, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @Wm335td:, I have dug up the Afd that related to this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Triggs. Its states that typically we expect a group to have an exceptional regional coverage Having it is single locality is not coverage as defined per WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 21:24, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are referring to an editor's !vote in a single AfD? - I am referring to the actual WP:GNG guideline. "Reliable" means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability. "Sources"[2] should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.[3] Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability. "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent. We will just disagree. Wm335td (talk) 01:28, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That comment is one of the best administrators on Wikipedia and reaffirms the fact that WP:SIGCOV means more than a city-wide act. We are really looking at the WP:MUSICBIO policy but both GNG and MUSICBIO only really work if there is coverage. If it is a local entity, whatever it is, then it doesn't work. There is no coverage. scope_creep^Talk 08:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And you making that same arguments that the folk in that other Afd made. You fail to understand consensus. scope_creep^Talk 08:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators are not super-editors and they must follow and interpret guidelines just as we do. - So you have pointed to a single !vote rationale by a single editor (not even a closer's rationale) and then you hold it up as a guideline. I understand our position and I understand our notability guidelines. As I have stated I disagree with your position. Also Madison is not near Milwaukee and not a hometown - Madison is 90 miles west with a population of 200k. We have both made our points and this AfD is getting crowded with each of us repeating ourselves. Wm335td (talk) 13:15, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

90miles and 200k just confirms it. It is next door. It justs confirms that you don't understand the consensus. There is no regional nor country wide coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV scope_creep^Talk 13:27, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Metro-Milwaukee area has 1.5 million people- if we are comparing nearby ...metro Chicago area is 90 miles south of Milwaukee and has 9.83 million people. I was pointing out Madison 90 miles west dos not have anything to do with this person or this AfD - it was referred to above as a "home town". Wm335td (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Meets WP:Band WP:CREATIVE#3. WP:NMUSICIAN#1 and WP:GNG. Apparently some of our editors are geographically challenged, and to them Wisconsin is 'just fly over country' and all the cities are fungible goods and 'local'. This is incorrect. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:08, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Gazette (Colorado Springs) would not be deemed "local" by me.

That he was featured in an issue of The Wise Musician ought to settle the matter.^[1]7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:21, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Most coverage being in the city he most often performs in of course. He did win awards for his skills. He has performed on notable albums and notable musicians who could hire anyone they wanted choose him at times. Dream Focus 15:54, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, Milwaukee and Chicago are the main music hubs, although traditionally Chicago looks down it nose. Madison is more of a college town than a music machine. I did find this from Milwaukee’s Shepherd Express. Looking at the spirit of why we have notability guidelines is that we don’t want fraudulent content and we strive for good articles. I think GNG has been met and a good article is possible. That a drummer of a band garners much attention at all is surprising. Gleeanon409 (talk) 22:51, 28 September 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.