Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ty Segall
This shouldn't have been speedy deletion material in the first place and the speedy was correctly declined. Arguments given by IP users who don't know Wikipedia rules are not grounds for deletion. The deletion history is similarly not grounds for deletion here. None of the previous deletions were AfDs and the final G4 deletion looks to have been improperly applied. Article has existed since December 2010 and has some references, albeit mostly poor ones. A cursory check of news sources shows there are many better sources though, especially for his newest album. I found numerous reviews, interviews and in-depth coverage in sources that should allow this to easily pass AfD. Off the bat, there's http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07-06/entertainment/chi-ty-segall-album-review-slaughterhouse-reviewed-20120706_1_album-review-slaughterhouse-melodies Chicago Tribune http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-29/entertainment/ct-ott-0930-ty-segall-20110929_1_songs-past-albums-new-album, http://www.prefixmag.com/reviews/ty-segall-band/slaughterhouse/66274/ Prefix, http://blogs.sfweekly.com/shookdown/2012/06/ty_segall_bands_facemelting_ne.php SF Weekly, http://www.heavemedia.com/2012/06/26/ty-segall-band-album-review/ Heave, http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13262-ty-segall-lemons/ Pitchfork, and http://blaremagazine.com/2011/06/18/q-and-a-ty-segall/ Blare. There are also plenty more reliable sources that demonstrate notability, allowing this to pass both  and . I'll add some of these to the article
— User:Gobonobo, 18:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:MUSICBIO||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)