Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Caple

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 speedy delete. Copyright concerns, https://www.facebook.com/iancaplemusic/info SpinningSpark 18:26, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Caple

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

Non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support. reddogsix (talk) 16:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. He's certainly notable in a meaningful real-world sense, and his production work gets several mentions on GBooks. --Michig (talk) 20:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - But he fails to meet Wikipedia based notability. reddogsix (talk) 16:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He's a well known and successful producer with a career spanning over 30 years with sufficient sources to confirm this, which meets the spirit of "have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of Wikipedia". --Michig (talk) 17:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

keep He's not Albini, but amongst UK people who know record producers, he's known as a record producer. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - How does this establish notability? reddogsix (talk) 21:42, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, I didn't realise that policy prevents anyone disagreeing with the nominator. As to the letter of policy, then Allmusic is a dull read but it's a decent catalogue that shows he has been around rather a while. Nor is that the only reference there, and has been there all along. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Really, sarcasm for asking a simple question. Do you really think I was rude or did I read you wrong? The Allmusic references are just lists as are most of the others. The management company article is not independent. The sum total of the references is they appear to be trivial. reddogsix (talk) 00:23, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 06:11, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable record producer, long standing career. Szzuk (talk) 19:27, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 00:38, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relist comment: I've noticed a potential copyright concern and listed the article for investigation on that issue. --j⚛e decker ^talk 00:39, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Most top google hits are social media. The first hit from a major source was the Gazette in England commenting on his bankruptcy.Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does any of that change his body of work? That's what he's notable for, not his bank balance. It's also common that many BLP subjects have a large footprint on social media and because social media is large, it's often the biggest footprint. That doesn't "dilute" what else they've done though. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2014 (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.