Deletion of James Lentini

Comment: Flutedude misses the point.  Establishing notability requires independent sources per , not whether Flutedude knows the composer or not.  As is well established in several points above, notability is clear by the articles in Fanfare, Gramphone, and other respected sources that independently verify the notability of Lentini by their inclusion of substantive articles and reviews about him.  If Wikipedia were simply a popularity contest, I fear that some very important people within lesser-known disciplines (like contemporary classical music) would be missing
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: I think that Scot Johnston has made a good case for why he should pass . That specifically deals with minority tastes, and it is important that Wikipedia should not only be a catalogue of US mass culture. There is a lot of truth, too, in what James470 says - some Wikipeidians are inherently suspicious of something that hasn't just been copied from elsewhere on the internet and insistence on 'independence from the subject' often provides no check at all on its veracity. But that isn't actually at the core of what most believe Wikipedia should be, and when you dig deeper you will discover that it is a highly questionable interpretation of what the guidelines actually say. So long as editors can show that they haven't just made the whole thing up then they should not be inhibited from contributing (even though it remains true that if you genuinely know more about a topic than almost anyone else it is better to create or contribute to a website on the topic, where you have editorial control). Wikipedia will then draw from that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)