Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rouzbeh Rafie

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. Sourcing has been found to be insufficient depth and independence. Star Mississippi 01:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rouzbeh Rafie

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:COMPOSER. None of the sources here establish WP:GNG notability, either on account of not being independent (personal website, profile at Ulysses platform, which appears to allow self published pages, Ermes 404 a publisher of his music, an interview with Rafie), reliable (wordpress blog) or significant (pretty much all the other sources).

Criterion 3 of COMPOSER states that those who have written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers. may be notable, but none of the competitions he has won appear to be "major" (at the very least, they don't have Wikipedia articles) Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Iran, and Italy. Mach61 23:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few more reliable independent sources (e.g. Association of Iranian Contemporary Music Composers (ACIMC)).

In my opinion, Rafie meets criteria for Wikipedia:NMUSICOTHER, saying "Composers and performers outside mass media traditions may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria: Has composed a number of notable melodies, tunes, or standards used in a notable music genre."

The competitions are notable from my point of view, especially considering the small world of contemporary experimental (classical) music. E.G. a festival like MUSEQUAL https://www.kokonainenfestival.fi/?lang=en has a very good reputation, even without a wiki article Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 08:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klaviermusikfan1972 None of the sources you added move the needle with regard to being independent and in-depth. (for example this is a profile on the website of an organization Rafie is a member of).

Rafie does not meet that criterion of NMUSICOTHER, because a "notable" composition is one that qualifies for an article, by having sources cover it. None of Rafie's originals have gotten that. Mach61 17:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we need more participation here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added another independen reliable source from the "Bach&Now Festival", where Rafie was chosen Artist-in-Residence. https://bachandnow.de/en/composer-in-residence/ Hopefully this will help to keep the article! Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 15:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klaviermusikfan1972 This profile is written by Rafie (As “Composer in Residence” of the Bach & now! festival, I am thrilled to share my musical journey and artistic vision with you. Mach61 19:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From my point of view, the fact that he was chosen artist in residence by the festival including three commissioned world premiere compositions, proofs that he is a notable composer. I checked the imprint, and Rafie is not a member of the festival board, festival founder or anything else. So it's at least an independent source. Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 20:24, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find some more independent secondary sources and added them to the article. https://aleph-fdn.com/directory/rouzbeh-rafie/ https://www.alexandra-sostmann.de/projects_e.html and an article from the italian newspaper "La Nazione" on winning the "Ennio Porrino Competition" and his composition "Chaconne". Hope this will help to prove that he is a serious composer and to keep the Wiki article! Thanks! Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 08:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.lanazione.it/grosseto/cronaca/premio-porrino-serata-finale-e-proclamazione-del-vincitore-rouzbeh-rafie-vn53mvj2 Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 09:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klaviermusikfan1972 Aleph is an organization that organizes composing evens, including some Rafie participated in. Not independent. Alexandra Sostmann is a pianist who worked with Rafie; ibid.

I will grant that the La Nazione article is unambigiously an independent, reliable source, and though it doesn't discuss Rafie in much depth, it does seem to confirm that the Ennio Porrino is major for WP:COMPOSER purposes. With that being said, the notability criteria for musicians are not absolute (Please note that... meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept), and for reasons explained below I still believe the article should be deleted.

One reason Wikipedia has notability criterion, as explained at WP:WHYN:

We require that all articles rely primarily on "third-party" or "independent sources" so that we can write a fair and balanced article that complies with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and to ensure that articles are not advertising a product, service, or organization. See Wikipedia:Autobiography for discussion of neutrality concerns of self-published sources.

Ultimately, it remains that there no entity independent of Rafie has bothered to cover his actions in any depth, meaning that any article about him must be based on his own word (that you've included a bunch of redundant biographies from affiliated organizations that are clearly based on his personal webpage doesn't change this fact). Mach61 23:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to emphasize once again that a large part of the article is not only based on biographical information, but is also clearly supported by additional independent sources:

Performances of his works at international festivals
Artist in Residence at international festivals
Awards at international composition competitions
Performances and recordings of his works by international artists
Publication of his works on international CD productions
Publication of his works in sheet music form

What kind of sources are otherwise required to independently verify certain stages in his biography? Does he have to submit his university diploma if a festival wants to publish his biography on the festival's website?

The article can certainly be improved! If there are passages that are not sufficiently sourced, the Wikipedia community can remove them, no problem. But I cannot understand at all the claim that Rafie does not have enough sufficient references to justify a Wikipedia article. Klaviermusikfan1972 (talk) 11:08, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Klaviermusikfan1972 An inependent source is simply one that isn't produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. I have exhaustively shown why almost none of the sources in the article are actually independent of Rafie, and will not bother to argue in circles about it. Mach61 02:52, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Virtually none of those qualify as secondary sources, which are required to show notability on Wikipedia. WP:SECONDARY:

A secondary source provides thought and reflection based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources.

CDs, sheet music, awards, performances, and musical recordings are all primary sources. Based on your argument, any person who has ever recorded music and put it on a CD would qualify for a Wikipedia article, and that's simply not how Wikipedia works. Left guide (talk) 13:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per my comment above and Mach61's thorough analysis of the sources throughout this discussion. Left guide (talk) 13:25, 29 September 2024 (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.