Talk:Joe Brooks (singer)

This article was nominated for deletion on 31 July 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 March 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

Pop music

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

dab

We might want to make this a disambiguation page for the two Joes and two Joseph Brooks. (John User:Jwy talk) 01:10, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. But there is only one Joe Brooks. The other is a non-notable singer already deleted as Joe Brooks (Singer) and now duplicated here and at Joe Brooks (Pop Singer). I will put the latter up for a Speedy delete. Lame Name (talk) 06:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple Joseph Brooks, one of which is called Joe Brooks on some pages. . . Pop Singer should be pop singer as well. (John User:Jwy talk) 07:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added more references and links to meet the notability guidelines. While he is unsigned, he is still notable because of his myspace presence. (Ryan User:evilkarrot talk 16:14, 12 March 2009 (PDT)

Notability

The guidelines for the notability of musicians are quite generous but I do not see how Joe Brooks ("Just another bedroom musician" according to his youTube page) meets them. Perhaps someone could enlighten me. Lame Name (talk) 03:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He is notable because he is the number one artist in the UK on myspace. Myspace is a major force in the music industry now. That is how a lot of artists get started. Just because he isn't signed and classifies himself as "a bedroom musician" doesn't mean he isn't notable. Ryan User:evilkarrot talk 09:21, 13 March 2009 (PDT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.56.210.14 (talk)

Notability (in the Wikipedia sense) is not some arbitrary point but the criteria by which a subject is deemed worthy of having an article. The link provided above lists what would be considered notable for a musician. An earlier version of this article has been removed due to a lack of notability please try and meet the specified criteria for non-trivial coverage as was requested for that original article. Lame Name (talk) 18:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to the notability guidelines listed under music, an artist is notable if they meet ANY of the criteria listed. Joe Brooks meets two criteria points:

1) It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable.

As linked in the references section, Joe Brooks has been on BBC radio, interviewed for the Birmingham Mail, AND Magazine, and other sources.

4) Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.

Some of the articles referenced point to his sold out UK Tour from February/March 2009.

Those points alone meet the guidelines set by wikipedia for notability. Evilkarrot (talk) 18:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide details in the article? Lame Name (talk) 18:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry. I guess I am new to this and don't understand the objection. I have referenced the sources in the article. I have made mention of facts from those articles. I have mentioned the national tour. What other suggestions do you think I should make? Thanks. Evilkarrot (talk) 21:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Local radio and press will interview anybody to fill their space. Very few of the interviewees will be notable. Does six gigs a national tour make? Does claiming to sell out a 200 capacity venue make him any different to the hundreds of working bands who do not have an article in Wikipedia? Had the BBC or Birmingham Mail (or any other nontrivial source) sent someone to a concert and reviewed it then we would be bordering on notability. Has there been any mainstream music press coverage at all? Lame Name (talk) 07:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does any band that gets interviewed or gets radio coverage also compete with Oasis for plays on myspace? The answer is no. Joe Brooks is notable because of his presence on myspace. He is a top artist on their charts. He plays to sold out shows in the UK and the US. In addition, the notability guidelines don't require national coverage, just multiple independent coverage (which Joe Brooks has). They also require "a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country." Joe Brooks has met that requirement. Evilkarrot (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noteworthy or not, the article reads more like a fan site than an encyclopedia and should be trimmed down. For example, saying the artist is planning to do a tour someday is not useful information, even if the artist was Bruce Springsteen. If the plans have progressed to the point where dates and venues have been chosen then in might be included.--RDBury (talk) 12:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the page really should be moved to avoid confusion with other people with similar names, there is at least one link to this article which should be to the article on the Joe Brooks of "You Light Up My Life" fame.--RDBury (talk) 12:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The original article was moved to make way for this "more relevant" article. I shall be putting this article up for deletion again as it has no place here and then, as suggested above, using this page to disambiguate the other Joe Brooks. Lame Name (talk) 12:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I moved this one and set up a dab page. Although I see this topic as not meeting WP:MUSIC (I can't quite speedy it, given the shreds of independent coverage and assertions about MySpace plays), I think it's too soon for another AfD, though any editor can start another given the outcome of the last was nc. If there is an AfD any time soon, the nom might take care to be very thoughtful and thorough about showing why, following policy, this topic would not belong here. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the disambiguation page. To my mind the lack of consensus on the AfD was due to the WP:MUSIC not being sufficiently explicit on which, if any, internet statistics, such as MySpace friends, YouTube plays, qualify as evidence of notability. In this particular case it seems probable that the MySpace and YouTube numbers were influenced by the similarity in names with the composer of "You Light Up My Life". There may have also been some confusion of the Joe Brooks song "Superman" with the Lazlo Bane song "Superman" which was used as the theme to Scrubs. Not only do the songs have the same name but they are in similar styles so a casual listener might not notice the difference. It should also be noted with respect to the BBC, that it has a great many outlets with varying levels of exposure, and coverage on "Good Morning Somerset" should not be equated with coverage on the World Service. Finally, I did listen to one or two of his songs and he does have talent (IMO) and it's possible that the guy could have a #1 UK hit by 2011. But WP:NOTCRYSTAL implies that it's not the purpose of Wikipedia to be ahead of the curve on these things. That job is best left to record companies and agents.--RDBury (talk) 16:30, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Following up, it appears that Joe Brooks is starting a UK tour today.--RDBury (talk) 19:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another follow up, Joe Brooks has signed with Lava records. Notability guidelines state that releasing an album under a significant label is sufficient for notability. There are still two problems however. First, signing is not the same as releasing an album. Second, while the old Lava Records would have qualified as a significant label, that label was absorbed into a larger label and this Lava is a new incarnation created by the founded of the old label, Jason Flom. The new Lava has yet to prove itself and so it's hard to claim that it qualifies as a significant label at the moment.--RDBury (talk) 14:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The actual requirement is...

Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).

We are still a long way from notability here. Lame Name (talk) 17:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Official website

The official website link goes to an unfinished page which hasn't been updated in a while. I'm adding the singer's MySpace page since that seems to be the de facto official page (includes concert info etc.) I know WP:ELNO frowns on using MySpace links but there is an exception provided for official pages.--RDBury (talk) 19:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELNO says: Note that under WP:External links#What should be linked, a link to a social networking site may be included when it is an official website for a business, organization, or person. However, Wikipedia does not provide a comprehensive web directory to every official website, and more than one official website should be listed only when the additional links provide unique content and are not prominently linked from other official websites.

The MySpace page is prominently linked from the "official" website. Lame Name (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, but the joebrooks.com site is basically a "Coming Soon" banner with links at the bottom. I think a good compromise would be to just list the MySpace page for now since that also has links to related pages. If and when the joebrooks.com site is ready for prime time then it the link can put back to what it was.--RDBury (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coming soon - much like his notable career. We hold our breath in anticipation.Lame Name (talk) 02:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Tancock

Joe's birth name is Joe Tancock. Yes, it has the word 'cock' in it, why else do you think he picked a friendlier stage name? Edits to the article adding his birth name keep getting reverted because people think it's vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.16.160.8 (talk) 14:46, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't remove it because I thought it was vandalism; I removed it because personal info in a biography of a living person needs a citation to a reliable source. I tried to find one but was unable. Do you have a reliable source (such as a newspaper or magazine article) that reports his birth name as Tancock? Thanks, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:40, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joe Brooks (singer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://bandhumor.net/joebrooks.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Joe Brooks (singer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:41, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]