Deletion of Wendy Phua

Comment: I'm not an admin). Those articlse can be subjected to fD|a deletion debate. For this case, let's talk about the current subject. Please avoid argument such as: "|What about article X?". Now, the solution is simple. Just provide |non-trivial independent and reliable secondary sources that cover the subject, for instances, reviews or interviews. You should read |our verifiability policy
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A||WP:WAX||WP:SOURCE||WP:V)

Comment: All in all, fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: Dear Dekisugi, it is to my knowledge that Wendy will be having an interview with an online music portal in Singapore regarding her EP and performances very soon. Would that comply with article 1 in  under Criteria for musicians and ensembles where Wendy Phua is subject of non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable? Pardon my questions but this is my first article and I'm trying to get along in understanding the various exact rules
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: Dear administrators, I am behind the writing of the said article Wendy Phua and understand there are laws governing contents on the wikipedia as according to  in this case. However I am confused as to why then, are article like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.P.I.C and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_Problem allowed to stay up on wikipedia. They are like Wendy Phua a Singaporean band, and in fact these two bands are not even performing as regularly as Wendy Phua. I would appreciate if someone can be so kind as to enlighten me on this matter. Thanks for your time and consideration
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)