Deletion of Jason van Wyk

Comment: Artist passes 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSICBIO)

Comment: Igloo magazine in a respectable e-zine with an editorial board. I would consider that an independent source that is significant coverage. Likewise, the Vancouver Weekly source is significant, but because it is an interview it lacks enough independence to count towards RS. The Ebert film review, the Criterion Collection source, and the David LaChapelle sources don't even mention van Wyk so I don't think that counts towards RS. It's not clear the Fluid Radio is anything more than a glorified blog. Headphone Commute claims independence but insists on anonymity, so there's really no way of knowing if they are truly independent because it lacks transparency. As such I would consider it an unreliable source. Everything else is directly connected to van Wyk (ie his record label) or is trivial, There are no All Music reviews, just a bare bones profile which is trivial. All together, there just isn't enough independent coverage to meet  or , and there are no awards or charts or any other criteria which the artist meets
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:MUSICBIO)

Comment: Sourcing fails to meet the bar of , , or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NMUSICIAN||WP:NBIO||WP:GNG)

Comment: Created by a probable |single-purpose account, and note that the article refers to the musician by his first name. That is done by oneself or a passionate fan who is likely to exaggerate. Despite the many sources in the article, those that are not about other people are from the musician's own website and social media, plus some record company and directory listings. He does have some blog reviews (e.g. https://independentclauses.com/jason-van-wyk-attachment-and-opacity/) but he has not been noticed by the independent music media. Does not meet the requirements at  or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:NMUSICIAN||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: It's nice to see my name repeated so many times, but we can let the community evaluate each side of the argument. However I think you need to become more familiar with Wikipedia's definition of "reliable source" at 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: The person seems notable per |MUSICBIO#10 as he has been comosers of notable films and have albums published under notable record labels. But the article content suffers from NPV concerns and is promotional, it defintely requires cleanup
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSICBIO)

Comment: Having credits on notable works doesn't automatically confer notability. I don't see any depth-of-coverage to support , nor anything to support  notability (#10 in itself doesn't quite cut it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:MUSICBIO)