Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kai Exos

:{{la|Kai Exos}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kai_Exos Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Kai Exos}})

Looking at WP:MUSICBIO - he has one LP under his belt, some song placement (the 'most added' part of a national music chart, not the main chart itself), Gnews is giving me nothing on his recording career. Mr. Vernon (talk) 20:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

• Delete non-notable musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

• Keep The article is clearly a stub, but I believe the subject reaches notability. He fulfills many of the requirements mentioned in WP:MUSBIO, including: Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself, Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart, among others. His performance at the Sundance Film Festival should also be taken into account when considering his notability in my opinion.Waffen77 (talk) 00:39, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
• Delete. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. Coverage in sources is non-existent to trivial, the longest article I could find was two paragraphs and that was a niche review of the album and not the artist. The "national chart" he's been on is not actually a national chart per WP:NMUSIC, it's a very niche chart, thus does not confer notability. No longer a penguin (talk) 13:11, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
• Keep This is a tricky one, I agree that the charts where he appears are not acceptable according to WP:NMUSIC, however I do believe he has a good amount of independence coverage, small, but there is, and it may be enough to achieve notability. Besides that, his participation in the Sundance Film Festival (and the coverage about that), must also be considered when establishing his notability, this according to point 4 of WP:NMUSIC. Its a weak keep, but its a keep all the same.Screense (talk) 00:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
• Keep I agree, he has a good amount of independence converage to acchieve notability, and his apperances in the charts should be considered as part of the discussion as well.Discocheck (talk) 00:57, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

::Can you please show which coverage you consider to constitute "good amount of independent coverage", because I'm not seeing it in the article, nor in the sources I could find. Charts should most definitely not be taken into account per WP:NMUSIC, unless they generate coverage (which they don't). No longer a penguin (talk) 08:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

• Delete as the Keep comments are from clear SPAs and it's clear none of this amounts to actual genuine substance, that's all we need for deletion, no need for others to suggest "But it's important!". SwisterTwister talk 04:31, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
• On Hold pending Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Waffen77. Mkdw^talk 07:43, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
• {{CUnote}} Discocheck and Screense (and the creator of the article) are {{confirmed}} socks of Waffen77.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:48, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.