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 keep. There is no reason to expect that relisting would yield a different outcome. BD2412 T 20:28, 24 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Chris Yonge (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)

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

Fails WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:MUSICBIO. No indication of awards or charted songs, and a paucity of biographical details in secondary sources. The 54 sources cited contain the usual links to self-sourced promo sites and links that mention this person's name only, although in the entire list there were four sources which were longer than one word or sentence:

• [1] - A primary source interview on what appears to be a for-pay promotional website, and is the source for most of the biographical details in the article.
• [2] - A two-paragraph biography on what appears to be a user-submitted website called "Earmilk".
• [3] - A three-paragraph introduction in "The Fader" to a video by Chris Yonge, which contains no biographical information.
• [4] - An introduction to a Chris Yonge video in "Exclaim", which contains no biographical information. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC) reply

@ User:Magnolia677: Here are why the references you mentioned above meet WP: BASIC, ANYBIO and MUSICBIO

* 1 - is not "a primary source interview on what appears to be a for-pay promotional website, and is the source for most of the biographical details in the article." - It is, in fact, a secondary source publications website of creative individuals who work in the field of advertising / creative industries.

* 2 "Earmilk" actually has a wiki page here at Earmilk and is not a "user-submitted website" but in fact is an award-winning music journal which is written by a hired team and not just any random user.

* 3 - The Fader is a reputable source which has information on "Toronto-based artist Chris Yonge"'s new single "CASH" contributing to his music career.

* 4 Exclaim! is also a reputable secondar source which contains information on a single released by him which also contributes to his "music career" . TwinTurbo ( talk) 14:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nominator. I support the deletion and this article is failing its bio. You forgot to mention WP:GNG to be failed this article as well. Thanks. 2001:569:74D2:A800:E0E3:1A4A:13E8:E800 ( talk) 00:22, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This IP address has only been active since today, making contributions to only the page in the discussion. Could be a case of WP:SOCK or WP:MEAT. TwinTurbo ( talk) 13:34, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Also, can you explain why it doesn't meet GNG? Thee article has significant reliable secondary sources which are independent from the artist himself . TwinTurbo ( talk) 14:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Article undoubtedly meets WP:BASIC, WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG

In addition to references 3 + 4 above, he has been a topic on sources by Local10.com, Billboard, HipHopCanada, Nowtoronto.com and Newswire.ca, give the article in the subject to meet criteria 1, 4, 10, WP:MUSICBIO as he has been the subject of multiple published works appearing in sources that are reliable, and ndependent of the musician, has been a supporting act in multiple tours and has been a part of a music team for Tim Horton's campaign amongst others. TwinTurbo ( talk) 14:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. . TwinTurbo ( talk) 14:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: more information has been added including a reference from BroadwayWorld on his recent works. [5] . TwinTurbo ( talk) 19:48, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep If Earmilk and exclaim.ca are considered reliable sources, and they give coverage to his music, that makes him a notable musician. Dream Focus 22:12, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Dream Focus: I thought that too, but in fact if you read what has been written about this person in Earmilk and exclaim it is not "significant coverage", but a discussion about one of his videos. The reason I nominated this article for deletion is because there is simply nothing biographical written about this person in a reliable secondary source. Creating YouTube videos that are reviewed by notable magazines does not bestow Wikipedia notability. Have a look yourself at the sources. Magnolia677 ( talk) 22:40, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

They wouldn't talk about his music at all, unless he was notable. Dream Focus 22:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Dream Focus: Please take a moment to read WP:ENN. Thanks. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:03, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

That's an essay, just someone's unpopular opinion, not enough people supported it to promote it to a guideline. Wikipedia:Notability (music) is the relevant guideline here. All guideline pages have a disclaimer at the top that reads This page documents an English Wikipedia notability guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Dream Focus 23:12, 17 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Please also refer to my comments in ARoseWolf's entry on more references which shows the article has significant coverage online. . TwinTurbo ( talk) 19:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep per WP:HEY. Some of the sources are less than reliable, but altogether it's been improved greatly in the past three days. Bearian ( talk) 23:17, 18 January 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:N and WP:GNG the subject must receive significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent secondary sources. Outside of the multiple sources, if you define that as numerical, the subject does not pass the only notability guideline that matters. WP:Notability (music) can be used to presume notability for article creation but presumed notability can be rebutted. -- ARoseWolf ( Talk) 18:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

The subject has significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent secondary sources. Here are a few which show the subject meets WP:N and WP:GNG but above all meets WP:UCS. [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] . TwinTurbo ( talk) 19:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Forgot to mention this one above too in: [16] . TwinTurbo ( talk)
• TwinTurbo I admire your fight for this article, I really do, but "bludgeoning us to death" with your repeated information is disruptive. You said your points and I am willing to accept we disagree. It is my view, as I stated and as indicated below, that the sources you call reliable are not, in fact, reliable and the sources you say give the subject "significant" coverage do not live up to the definition of that term. That does not take away from the regional, national or global significance of the subject to those who like him. Only that the criteria here determines that the subject of this article is not notable for inclusion here. -- ARoseWolf ( Talk) 21:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Please allow me to summarize the 10 sources mentioned above:

• [17] - A three-paragraph introduction in "The Fader" to a video by Chris Yonge. This source contains no biographical information.
• [18] - A two-paragraph article in "Earmilk", which contains the following biographical information (spelling error included):

  CHRIS YONGE, who has been slowly grinding within the chilly city's booming music industry since the age of 19, when he decided to fully dive into his passion by running a recording studio where he fully honed his engineering & rapping skills... He now 25-year old upstart is now set to deliver the follow up to his excellent debut NEGATIVES LP, a three track EP entitled SS17 that has Chris exploring a much more reflective and Toronto-inpspired sound. Today EARMILK has been given the opportunity to debut the second single off of the project, a nostalgic slow-burner entitled 19 that has the rising artist reminiscing on his humble beginnings, assisted by fellow Toronto MC Kaelen.

• [19] - A user-submitted blog post on "Banger of the Day".
• [20] - An article in "The Hype Magazine" which says the following about Chris Yonge: "Featuring rising star Chris Yonge". That's it!
• [21] - A user-submitted blog post on "Banger of the Day".
• [22] - A review of a Chris Yonge album on a site called "Daily Chiefers", a music-submission site where a reviewer decides which submissions to feature. This particular review was written by "Carrier" who has made "7724 POSTS" on the site.
• [23] - An introduction to a Chris Yonge video in "Exclaim", which contains no biographical information. It features a quote about the video by Chris Yonge himself, which leans this source towards being a primary source.
• [24] - A user-submitted blog post on "Banger of the Day".
• [25] - A press release which mentions his name once.
• [26] - A user-submitted blog post on "Banger of the Day". Magnolia677 ( talk) 20:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• First and foremost, thank you for your admiration ARoseWolf, but not once have I stated to "bludgeon anyone to death" nor is it my intention. I am merely engaging in discussion. And Magnolia677, Earmilk is a reputable secondary source on the artist (a spelling mistake does not make it any less reliable). To say the Exclaim! reference has no biographical info is false. It contains points like:
  

"Yonge delivered his intro project in 2018 and is expected to release his debut full-length album this year." which is contributing substantially to his musical biography.

Also, a quote form the artist in a passage does not equate the source to being a primary source. Exclaim is a secondary source and a reputable one too. As with Fader, Hype, BroadwayWorld, newswire. Although it may be a sentence or two, they are still also reputable secondary sources which show mention to the musical career section of his biography. There are others mentioned in the article which is contributing to his biography. He definitely meets WP:NM 1, as the sources mentioned here are published works that are written by somebody else about the musician. . TwinTurbo ( talk) 22:35, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Ah yes, the "Broadway World" source, which states: "working with producer ​Chris Yonge​", and absolutely nothing more about this person. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:11, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Not saying its the strongest source, but his work as a producer is still a valid reference to be included in the article to support his notability. . TwinTurbo ( talk) 23:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

A source like that could only serve to bolster notability once it is established. It can not be used to confirm or affirm notability. -- ARose Wolf 18:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC) reply

The key word or words in all of this is "mention", "mentions" and "mentioned". Significant coverage is not mentions. Also, if multiple (numerical) sources repeat the same information almost verbatim as other sources they are not considered multiple (intellectual) sources used for notability criteria, even if each source is reliable and secondary. They would all be considered ONE source. That is straight from the notes on the criteria itself. -- ARose Wolf 16:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Delete per discussion. Onursides ( talk) 19:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

The bulk of the discussion hasn't leviated to delete so can you still use this as a valid reason? WP:WDPM . TwinTurbo ( talk) 19:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This user was created today and has only been participating in deletion discussions. May require an investigation. . TwinTurbo ( talk) 19:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep as in the round there is enough coverage for WP:GNG. The coverage is mainly career focussed but there is some biographical information so deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk) 01:17, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep - As it's written it's not the strongest article in terms of sources, but sources are there and are in the article I just wish it had some stronger sources with more coverage. On the NowToronto article about the cancelling of the Fringe festival I see reference to a Yonge-Dundas Square, but no reference to Chris Yonge, is he mentioned in that article? Otherwise I don't see anything verifying that he was supposed to play there. If it does mention him and I've overlooked it I'd say that would be yet another good reference to show notability. - Aoidh ( talk) 03:42, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Subject has at least 3 sources of significant coverage for WP:GNG. It does contain weak or irrelevant sources (editors should consider improving/removing these) but does include some which contribute to his music career for WP:MUSICBIO too. CAVETOWNFAN ( talk) 14:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply

@ TwinTurbo: Do you think this one too "May require an investigation"? Magnolia677 ( talk) 14:23, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Magnolia677: Yes . TwinTurbo ( talk) 15:57, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep A nicely presented article on a notable musician. Some of the sources are a little low tier and would need to be improved before this could receive a B or GA rating, but that's no reason to delete. FeydHuxtable ( talk) 17:25, 23 January 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.