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. Nomination withdrawn with the only delete vote from a confirmed blocked sockpuppet. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 01:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Schellhorn[edit]

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

Matthew Schellhorn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsure what to make of this article, but I don't think it meet notability requirements or passes WP:MUSICBIO. Another user had prodded it in the past, but that prod was removed refunded. Out of the 29 sources so far, 5 of them are the subject's own website (equaling approx. 17% of sources on the page - if I can do math correctly). The AllMusic ref does not count toward notability (per WP:ALLMUSIC at WP:RSPSOURCES, which states "Listings without accompanying prose do not count toward notability.") The "Notable Alumni" failed verification as a redirect, even at the Wayback Machine. The rest of the sources are namechecks with a few exceptions: the bio at his recording studio website (thus not independent, as they are marketing him); an op-ed he wrote (again, not independent); and a coat of arms he obtained (no biographical info or assessment involved). The Girton College newsletter does not count toward notability, as it fails point 1 on WP:MUSICBIO, which states "Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases" are not acceptable. The source I can see that is an independent RS is the one in the Irish Times here. Overall, I believe this is a lot of listings amalgamated to make for a nice CV. Kbabej (talk) 22:27, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Kbabej (talk) 22:29, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Kbabej (talk) 22:31, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Kbabej (talk) 22:33, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per finding of sources by Bebopjohnson, previous vote withdrawn.

*Delete per nom not enough news coverage. Citterz (talk) 10:22, 8 April 2021 (UTC) striking confirmed blocked sockpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 01:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bebopjohnson: Welcome to WP. Interesting to note the same day you've signed up you are vigorously and rapidly !voting at AfD. Can you point to a policy/coverage that meets GNG/MUSICBIO notability requirements for this subject? I would also point you to WP:OTHERSTUFF, which states "Plenty of articles exist that probably should not", and is an argument to specifically avoid in AfD discussions. --Kbabej (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bebopjohnson: I would also encourage you to read WP:SKCRIT, in which you will see the requirements for "Speedy keep", which I would argue is used incorrectly here. --Kbabej (talk) 17:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kbabej: Thanks, I agree. Speedy Keep should in fact have been 'Keep'. As for notability, he clearly meets the following criteria as he has two albums released by Naxos (the largest Classical Music Label in the world): "Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable)." That seems pretty black and white to me. Bebopjohnson (talk) 18:00, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bebopjohnson: You're quoting WP:MUSICBIO, which states "Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable..." (emphasis mine) if they meet one of those criteria. It also states "...meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept." On MUSICBIO, it links to WP:NBIO, which the subject does not pass. --Kbabej (talk) 18:12, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kbabej: On that basis (WP:NBIO) you have made my point for me! As per WP:NBIO "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." A simple Google Search shows this to be the case. I realize that deletion probably feels easier than improving the page, but it seems like a better approach would be to actually improve the sourcing on the page. Bebopjohnson (talk) 21:24, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bebopjohnson: Can you provide those RS that are independent of the subject and independent of each other? In the nomination above, one is listed from the Irish Times. I didn’t see more. —Kbabej (talk) 21:31, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kbabej: Sure thing! Just a quick handful that I found after a few minutes of searching. 60,000 results to go, so surely more to find!
* https://arcana.fm/2020/11/17/matthew-schellhorn-howells/
* https://sound-scotland.co.uk/news/review-lunchbreak-concert-with-matthew-schelllhorn
* https://www.classical-music.com/reviews/miscellaneous/messiaen-73/
* https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/musical-son-doncaster-returns-his-roots-charity-piano-concert-262678
* http://www.mvdaily.com/articles/2008/05/matthew-schellhorn1.htm
* http://www.musicweb-international.com/SandH/2008/Jul-Dec08/schellhorn1311.htm
* https://www.indcatholicnews.com/news/27766
* http://www.compositiontoday.com/interviews/matthew_schellhorn.asp
Bebopjohnson (talk) 22:17, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bebopjohnson: I would argue that those definitely meet WP:THREE (essay, not policy), and in AGF I will withdraw my nomination based on the further refs presented. Thank you for diving into the ether to get those sources. --Kbabej (talk) 22:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bebopjohnson: Per WP:CLOSEAFD, looks like since the first two editors' !votes were for deletion, I cannot close this discussion early. I understand (and could be mistaken) it needs to run the 168 hrs, or an admin must close it if closing early? --Kbabej (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kbabej: Thank you for the very civil dialogue and for giving me a chance to go root around for these. For good measure and for posterity, I have found a few more in my searching:
* http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2015/09/music-for-psp-pilgrimage-interview-with.html#.YG-HUrRKiHF
* https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/articles/3623--awards-recordings-of-the-year-2020-our-top-100
* https://pianodao.com/2020/12/24/herbert-howells-piano-music/
* http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2020/Aug/Howells-piano-v1-8571382.htm
* http://agoraclassica.com/reviews/absolute_magazine/-1/6323/herbert-howellshowells-piano-music-%E2%80%93-vol-1-matthew-schellhorn-pf
* https://www.classicalmusicdaily.com/2020/09/howells.htm
* https://operatoday.com/2016/06/london_a_90th_birthday_tribute_to_horovitz/
Thank you Kbabej!
Bebopjohnson (talk) 22:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow, I really gotta start going past the first 2 pages in google! Thanks for finding those, Bebopjohnson. My vote is refunded. Mcguy15 (talk) 00:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking another look! I appreciate it. —Kbabej (talk) 00:51, 9 April 2021 (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.
More