Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Hamnett

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. Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Hamnett[edit]

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

Non-notable musician and academic (?). Page was created on 5 September 2009 by User:Mikeymd (suspected COI - see also below) and nominated for speedy deletion the same day. Speedy was declined by another editor on the grounds that Hamnett is "associated with notable acts".

In fact, none of the acts the article associates him with has a Wikipedia article,so notability of the acts is highly questionable, but regardless of their position, personal notability is not inherited in this way. There is nothing in the article to suggest that his work (for example, with The Lion King) is in any way notable; again, the shows he appeared in may be notable but this does not automatically transfer.

A Google search reveals nothing to suggest notability. There are several links to directories (e.g. of music teachers) and personal web pages of the subject and Myspace etc.. Another link is to a webpage of a friend of his. As an academic, he is not notable; in fact, the university website shows he is an instrumental tutor", so not a tenured academic in any case. The only vaguely independent sources are from a local newspaper, but that is simply a press release and a listing in Murcia Today: both of these are basically ads for the Canterbury Christ Church University big band (no Wikipedia article), which are actually about the band, not him.

Incidentally, Mikeymd's only contribution to Wikipedia apart from creating this article, was in August 2007 when he added Michael Hamnett as a notable person in Failsworth (see: [1]. This was reverted as "vanity". Emeraude (talk) 12:25, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lacks coverage in 3rd party sources. No significnat claim of notabilty. RadioFan (talk) 12:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. The-Pope (talk) 15:56, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 19:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable subject that fails WP:MUSIC. Article also has no verifiable references either failing WP:RS] and WP:V. Charon123able (talk) 19:01, 13 April 2013 (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.