The two articles mentioned are near orphans: they are linked by each other, but otherwise only by one list in one case and two lists in the other. Willmore appears unknown on Google, except in the article his page links to, and that page has two different spellings of his surname.
Both articles use the word "Christian" in the ambiguous way, frequent among Christian fundamentalists/evangelicals, that
could imply that doctrines, thought by denominations like Episcopalians, Catholics, Anabaptists, and Quakers to be crucial differences among denominations, are overrated trivialities, but
for many of them seem to express that if you don't claim to be "born again" you aren't a real Christian.
Cleaning up that PoV is not the point: it is mentioned here because it is so consistent with the possibility that the creator of these two articles determined notability solely by being impressed in a personal contact with the band and person.
Non-fame is also suggested by the designation on the linked Web page (based in the UK, where Willmore met his wife) of the band as "grassroots", often a euphemism for "non-famous".
The web site takes submissions - so anyone can have a page there. Secretlondon 21:56, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Though the two articles require separate votes, my nomination reasons are identical, and copied on both discussion pages.
It likely was made with the consent of User:Marine 69-71, but IMO is not a valid vote until placed using that account. IMO, even merely technical forgery must not be tolerated because it is confusing at the best of times and it impedes the recognition of ill-intentioned forgery; IMO this act requires an explicit promise never to repeat this practice. --Jerzy(t) 00:49, 2004 Jul 1 (UTC)
User:Marine 69-71's user page IDs him as User:AntonioMartin's father. With some 400 edits (and no obvious evidence of excessive failure to preview) since May 24, he is far from a being an typical sock-puppet, and IMO considering him any kind of sock-puppet would be paranoid. On the other hand, those judging the degree of consensus may (assuming, as i do, that he will cast an equivalent non-forged vote) want to take note of the close connection.--Jerzy(t) 00:49, 2004 Jul 1 (UTC)
Allmusic hasn't heard of him or his band. Delete unless notability verified by people other than AntonioMartin. Mr. Martin is excluded because he wrote the page. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:02, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Google hasn't heard of the second CD - I imagine that whatever born again Christian music market exists in the Uk would have some sort of web presence if these people were big. Secretlondon 21:53, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I've checked a few Christian music web shops and they don't sell it. Secretlondon 02:32, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Delete: Music notability is really tough to determine, because technology now allows anyone at all (seriously) to produce 500-5000 CD's and sell them from the trunk ("boot"). Releasing a CD is not as notable as releasing an album was. Wikipedia doesn't have to duplicate Allmusic, TrouserPress, or any of the other all-music sites' listings and ought to be able to wait for more notability before inclusion. (However, the Christian music scene is very real in the UK, and I'd wager there's a chart for it, too.) Geogre 00:18, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Delete: no evidence of notability. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:28, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Delete. There's a presumption that if a musician is listed on allMusic.com or has more than N Google hits, he deserves a Wikipedia page. I think the standard should be, will this person/topic be of interest in 10, 50, 100, 200 years? Elvis? Certainly. Bob Dylan? Unquestionably. Arlo Guthrie? Of course. Paul Whitmore Sr.? At my most generous, the jury is still out, and so should be the article. -- orthogonal 01:20, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[vote moved from VfD by Jerzy(t) 03:44, 2004 Jul 1 (UTC)]
Delete Not Notable SkArcher 16:47, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
