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 delete. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Fath[edit]

Michael Fath (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)

NN guitarist, fails the GNG, WP:MUSICBIO and WP:AUTHOR. No substantive coverage in reliable, independent sources beyond namedrops. A superficial look at the article shows a number of otherwise reliable sources ... but nothing with links one can actually examine. Some of those are inline cites to some pretty startling claims, such as that this fellow is a peer to the likes of Eddie Van Halen, Jeff Beck, Joe Satriani and other guitar legends. So ... since extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and this is a BLP, I started digging.

As it happens, I found nothing. Guitar Player magazine has a well-tuned archive of everyone who’s been featured in it and everyone who’s written for it; Fath’s name does not appear. Guitar World magazine has an archive in which his name does not appear. The two Washington Post publication dates cited do not have anything about Fath in them. (Yay online library research access!) Amazon does sell the three novels the article says he’s written, none with a sales rank over 1.5 million, and all published out of iUniverse, which is a print-on-demand self-publishing outfit. Then you toss in that the article was created by a SPA whose sole Wikipedia activity this was, and that User:Michaelfath contributed much of the info, and there's COI as well. This guy does exist, and he has indeed released CDs, but too much of this article is BS, and he just doesn't clear notability muster. Ravenswing 19:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Ravenswing 19:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Ravenswing 19:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Ravenswing 19:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not notable as either a writer or a musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:25, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - There's Post coverage from the 1980s and 1990 (I'm not getting into a bagel shop-is-it-national-or-regional discussion), AllMusic (his albums are ratings-reviewed but no bio?); Alfred and Hal Leonard have published his guitar solo tablatures or whatever. For me, it's a pseudo-red flag when the top hits are for his site and his "celebrity speaker" agency. Interested in what other editors think--I don't want my bias against possible "feather in my cap" pages to distort what on the merits could be a very weak keep case. And as Ravenswing pointed out, he most likely edited his own page. Caro7200 (talk) 21:54, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Non-notable guitarist. Couldn't find anything on him besides databases, non-independent sites and other people of the same name (apparently there is also a doctor of this name as well). When Allmusic has no bio it is not a reliable source. "His albums are rating-reviewed" does not establish notability either imo, as those ratings could came from users who post on Allmusic. And I am really tired of single-purpose accounts and CoI people. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The blue stars indicate AllMusic...unless it's a site error, those ratings are not from users, I think...I'm not sure why there are AllMusic ratings alone, never seen it before, maybe Richard3120 knows...regardless, yeah, notability is doubtful. Caro7200 (talk) 00:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Caro7200: it happens more frequently than you think, actually, on account of the ratings and reviews being done separately. They are AllMusic ratings, but it's true that if there's nothing more than a star rating, many editors don't really consider that a great sign of notability. Richard3120 (talk) 00:58, 5 August 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.