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. j⚛e decker^talk 15:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mikkel Hess[edit]

Mikkel Hess (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)

Non-notable musician. No evidence of significant independent coverage available. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:32, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 15:57, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 15:57, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom TheFrontDeskMust (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:17, 10 August 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, —Tom Morris (talk) 22:36, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Even with additional references, not clear that it meets WP:GNG. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Most of the sourcing is tangential, either not particularly mentioning him much or providing lists of music he's produced, but not concentrating on him at all. The two exceptions, [1] and [2], aren't secondary: as news sources meant to introduce us to the guy, they're primary sources and not chronologically independent. Nyttend (talk) 05:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - insufficient coverage in reliable sources to demonstrate notability per WP:BIO. ukexpat (talk) 12:18, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment First article by a new editor who may be having trouble finding their way around. I have given them a welcome box on their talkpage to help them. Also worth noting that they have commented on the talk page of this discussion. I do think it is very poor indeed that no-one bothered to actually message them about this proposed deletion! DuncanHill (talk) 10:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The creator of the article (Rosemarie Vind (talk · contribs)) has been notified about the discussion. The fact that said user has chosen to create a new user account (RoseVind13 (talk · contribs)) to protest the deletion is a separate problem. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:08, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • She removed links to discogs (a generally reliable source that simply wasn't addressing Hess himself) and replaced them with links to unreliable sources: a blog post and something that's apparently from the guy's personal website. In all fairness, she may well have forgotten the first account's password; it's not as if she's participated here under both usernames. Nyttend (talk) 11:28, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, I don't believe this is a case of sockpuppetry. I merely point it out to address DuncanHill's complaint that the article creator was not informed of the discussion. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:31, 14 August 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.