Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isobel Heyworth

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. Davewild (talk) 18:26, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Isobel Heyworth (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)

Seems to fail WP:GNG. Plenty of the usual music directory entries and one 2005 album review but nothing more. Most of what is said in the article has been unsourced for years and I suspect either promo or fan involvement. Sitush (talk) 00:52, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 June 7. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails notability. Doesn't seem like she went anywhere. Interview here from 2005, but nothing else, and her website is no more —Мандичка^YO 😜 03:06, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Looks borderline but I am inclined to keep here. We have an Allmusic bio already cited, the two sources identified above, and also a Manchester Evening News album review. Enough to have a well-enough sourced short article, and Googling is unlikely to find every piece of coverage that's out there. --Michig (talk) 06:41, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• FWIW, I live in Manchester and the MEN comes out with a lot of regurgitated press releases like that. It used to be a decent newspaper, back in the 1970s, and has been going downhill for years. - Sitush (talk) 06:47, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• del fails WP:MUSIC. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:26, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Unfortunately, I also have to agree with deleting because there's no good coverage even in the slightest with my searches finding the best here (not sure if this is her?) and here (one Contactmusic.com link). There's also no good target for moving elsewhere. SwisterTwister talk 04:54, 18 June 2015 (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.