Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fabrictramp (talk | contribs) at 22:25, 12 October 2008 (Listing Finish The Story). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Points of interest related to WikiProject Music groups on Wikipedia: Category |
Points of interest related to Musicians on Wikipedia: Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Assessment |
Deletion Sorting Project |
---|
|
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Bands and musicians. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Bands and musicians|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Bands and musicians.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Purge page cache | watch |
- Related deletion sorting
Bands and musicians
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Weak Keep. (non-admin closure) NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 03:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Finish The Story
- Finish The Story (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Fails WP:MUSIC. No chart success, no major tours, no extensive media coverage, no awards, no notability. Nouse4aname (talk) 15:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to This Window, primary notability is the Peter Bright connection. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, reliable coverage exists in ZigZag magazine and from the BBC. Meets criteria #1 of WP:MUSIC. Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]
- Comment. The ZigZag review is not currently sourced.Nouse4aname (talk) 09:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, no, but it is quoted in the BBC article, therefore I consider it likely that it does exist. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]
- Fair enough. However, I don’t think two articles satisfy the “multiple non-trivial published works”… Is there anything else out there? Nouse4aname (talk) 18:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, no, but it is quoted in the BBC article, therefore I consider it likely that it does exist. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]
- Comment. The ZigZag review is not currently sourced.Nouse4aname (talk) 09:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 05:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Links to other reviews and interviews have been added and the text expanded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by M4tr (talk • contribs) 17:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel Glen Timms
- Daniel Glen Timms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
My research leads me to the conclusion that the subject doesn't meet general notability guidelines or qualify for special consideration due to meeting special notability guidelines for musicians. Sources found are not what I consider to be reliable. Let's not forget to applaud Jimbellizzi for his efforts; it's obvious that he is trying hard to improve Wikipedia, which warrants further encouragement. — X S G 19:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Some assistance required, please. The AfD template on Daniel Glen Timms shows "this article's entry" as a redlink, which will make things more difficult for inexperienced users. Anyone know why this is happening or how to fix it? — X S G 19:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Hi, I added on more outside sources to improve the verifiability of this article. A review from Hooked on Music, a live studio interview from WETS (it's on his website, but also have a link to WETS confirming it), and more links to stations who have previously played the music. I feel that he has two full length studio albums that have received a lot of national attention, and additionally we now have reviews and playlists up from outside sources that should allow the article to stay. I apologize it took me so long to get it up, still learning the ropes of Wikipedia! Please let me know if there is more I need. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimbellizzi (talk • contribs) 03:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Hi, Jimbellizzi. I think this is the first time you've had experience with the AfD, or Articles for Deletion process. This is one of the constructs of Wikipedia, where editors make a determination whether articles meet the requirements for being kept on Wikipedia. There's documentation for how this procedure works here: WP:AfD. Typically, this page is used for editors to add their comments regarding keeping or deleteing the article. While lots of editors think that it's a matter of votes, it really isn't, as the process documentation will clarify. So anyway, I know that you're working hard on the article. I would recommend that you add your desired resolution outcome to this page (by adding *'''Keep''' - followed by the reason you think the article should be kept. I'll continue to work with you on the talk page of the article in order to suggest what might be needed to achieve notability. — X S G 04:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 04:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 05:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It would help us if there was some detailed discussion of the validity of the sourcing. Spartaz Humbug! 05:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. While there are many footnotes, on closer examination the sources don't hold up as WP:RS and various claims made appear to be unsupported by the sources cited. For example, the article says: "Daniel's first independently released demo received the highest-rated "rock" review of the year in 1998 by Music Connection Magazine". The footnote given points to the main website of the Music Connection magazine, http://musicconnection.com. However, no specifics in the reference are given (such as a direct link to the article or the date of publication, name of the article, etc). A search of the http://musicconnection.com website for "Daniel Glen Timms" returns 0 hits[1]. The article then says about "The Highway Home" album:"The album garnered strong support among many commercial, public and community radio stations". Two footnotes are given, one to the webpage of the artist and the other is this link[2] to KTEP radio site. The only mention of the name of the subject there is a listing of his song in the playlist column. No discussion of the song or the artist here and not something that can be characterized as "garnered strong support". We then proceed further in the article to the following statement: "His album, "La La Land," received his highest critical acclaim" with a reference to this Belgian site:http://www.rootstime.be/ The site is not searchable, but after looking around it a bit I could not find a mention of the name of Daniel Glen Timms there. The article then says, in relation to the same album:"with airplay worldwide and on over 130 radio stations". The reference given for this 130 stations claim is this link[3] to the website of a radio station WETS. The page link does not mention either the name of the artist or the name of the album. Moreover, searching the entire website for the name "Timms" produces a single hit[4], to a long photogaller containing one photograph from a performace by Timms. Nothing about 130 stations here. And so on. Too many basic WP:V problems here. Also, a googlenews search gives 0 hits [5]. Nsk92 (talk) 10:38, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom fails to meet the notability guidelines. JBsupreme (talk) 04:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Sources do not say what is suggested, which is very sneaky. Seems non-notable, per Nsk92.Yobmod (talk) 12:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Unanimous Keep. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 03:25, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lacey Mosley
- Lacey Mosley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Concerns about the sheer amount of unsourced bio info and cruft that has no relevence to notability if in fact there is any, has been tagged for clean up for sometime and not much is happening. Maybe a possible redirect. neon white talk 10:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:52, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The article is currently in poor shape, with unclear notability and WP:BLP violations. However she has received enough coverage in reliable source (for example [6] and [7] ) to be considered notable. --Megaboz (talk) 15:50, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Neither are those show any independent notability from the group she belongs to, both are about Flyleaf not her. Remember notability is not inherited. To be considered notable there must be evidence of coverage independent of the group. see Wikipedia:Notability (music) --neon white talk 09:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but needs serious revision RogueNinjatalk 14:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep This article contains some non-trivial coverage of Mosley apart from Flyleaf. (Section beginning "Hey Dad, come over here", for about 1000 words). Source has been introduced to the article. CJPargeter (talk) 13:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As i pointed out before the coverage is not independent of the band. The question that you have to ask is would she have featured in this article had she not been part of a notable group? i think the answer is a definite no. It's reliant on her being part of a notable group with no suggestion that she is otherwise notable. --neon white talk 23:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 10:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
B-Valentine
- B-Valentine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Musician of questionable notability. Bringing it here after declining an A7 speedy tag. Sandstein 11:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Unreferenced, notability not evident, fails WP:MUSIC. WWGB (talk) 11:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. QuidProQuo23 04:49, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn. No notable work. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 07:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 10:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the Fallen Dreams
- For the Fallen Dreams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- For the Fallen Dreams (album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Fails WP:MUSIC. No chart hits, no extensive media coverage, only one album released, no proof of major national tour Nouse4aname (talk) 11:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Also nominate the incorrectly named non-notable album too, For the Fallen Dreams (album). Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 13:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Oh yes, I was going to add the album in too, but forgot. Delete that too! Nouse4aname (talk) 13:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I think you should withdraw the AfD, because I'm curious how they're gonna name their second album...haha Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 21:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Oh yes, I was going to add the album in too, but forgot. Delete that too! Nouse4aname (talk) 13:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:54, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete artist and album. No sources found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm. There's actually quite a lot of google noise out there, loads of lyrics and torrents and whatnot, so they can't be total nonames. There's actually one in-depth review of the album at PopMatters, which I'd consider a reliable source. All others I turned up weren't published by reliable sources though, so I agree with the above and say
Delete, with no prejudice against recreation if more reliable reviews can be turned up. If it ends up being kept the album article should be renamed to Changes (For the Fallen Dreams album). --AmaltheaTalk 01:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 02:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Enrique Coria
- Enrique Coria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Fails notability for biographies since September 2007. Article is orphan and has very few Google hits. I was unable to find any article referring to him. Magioladitis (talk) 12:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I got quite a few relevant Google hits that seemed to match this fellow's article. Perhaps with some sourcing the article could be kept, unless he fails the artist criteria. Right now it's hard to tell, given that the article doesn't cite any sources. FusionMix 18:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. A Google News archive search finds plenty of sources, and he also seems to meet WP:MUSIC criterion 5 with multiple albums on a well-established label. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:32, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Courtney Corey
- Courtney Corey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Actor, singer, and dancer. Reads like a promotional piece. Is she notable? Sgroupace (talk) 07:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: where are reliable third-party sources? Alexius08 (talk) 08:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Fails WP:BIO. The scanty Google list, devoid of reliable sources, is a well-accustomed litany of non-notability: her personal website, followed by this Wiki article, followed by Youtube self-promotional clips, followed by Facebook, followed by Zoominfo ... toss in various Wiki mirrors, LJ and the like. Obviously she's very diligent at self-promotion, and when she achieves notability no doubt someone will write an article on her. Ravenswing 16:02, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Fails WP:NOTE and WP:BIO. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 01:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as an "actor, singer, and dancer" she has not contributed significant works to meet the criteria in WP:ENTERTAINER, nor has she met any of the criteria of WP:MUSIC or been covered sufficiently in reliable 3rd party sources to cover the general notability criteria. Additionally, Wikipedia is not for hosting CV's. Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 14:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ghetto Mafia
- Ghetto Mafia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Hip-hop group, no evidence of passing WP:MUSIC and no WP:RS. Record labels associated with this ensemble are all red-linked. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 17:40, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Per nomination - fails WP:MUSIC, only edited by two SPA editors. Bsimmons666 (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:04, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:32, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. fails WP:MUSIC as it is, and sources don't seem forthcoming. VG ☎ 04:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 07:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per nom Eatabullet (talk) 13:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. — Scientizzle 00:31, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seven Days Of Samsara
- Seven Days Of Samsara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Schuym1 (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What documentation needs to be provided to make this band legitimate in the eyes of Wikipedia?
- I realize that as an "underground" sort of thing, hardcore and punk tend to not garner the same level of media exposure as other popular acts, but there ought to be relativistic standards. i.e. bands, or rather genres of music, that have/has typically eschewed popular media shouldn't be expected to be as obviously present in those outlets.
- Take for example Tragedy who have no MySpace page or official website due to their take on capitalism, the internet, etc. The band is clearly relevant but online there exists little official/verifiable information because they operate outside of the conventional band/touring/promotion network for socio-political reasons. They are _essentially_ "punk" in that regard, but you're likely not going to see them getting front page coverage on CNN.com or other large/commercial news sites.
- Here's a few links of interest. If there are criteria that need to be met, please let me know and I will attempt to source additional information.
- - worldDownInFire (talk) 20:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The first 6 sources aren't reliable and Wikipedia can't be used a source. Read WP:MUSIC.Schuym1 (talk) 21:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 03:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, no reliable secondary sources to establish notability. Huon (talk) 13:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete if that's all there is as far as reliable sources go, there's no way this could be an article. And the main claim of notability (small-venue touring) is extremely weak anyway. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no reliable sources to establish notability. If a band deliberately goes out of the way to be inaccessible and avoid notice, and succeed, then they are non-notable. -- Whpq (talk) 17:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was redirect to Lukas Rossi. MBisanz talk 01:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rise Electric
- Rise Electric (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Not notable, tagged for almost 2 years, rationale given in talk but still fails, imo. PHARMBOY (TALK) 22:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Redirect to Lukas Rossi. Fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 05:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn and unsigned group. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 07:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This band doesn't seem to be notable. Eatabullet (talk) 12:58, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and Redirect to Lukas Rossi. Notable in the sense that they have a famous frontman, but not for any other reason as far as I can tell. Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. and then redirected to the band as a reasonable search term Black Kite 07:58, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ron Ficarro
- Ron Ficarro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Appears to fail WP:BIO. No sources to support notability, ghits do not support notability of this particular person. Not notable outside of a band. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete he doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria at WP:MUSIC and I can't find significant coverage, etc that would allow him to meet WP:N on his own. At the best it's a redirect to the band (if in fact it is notable). Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I can't see any citations that indicate that he's notable. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 20:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:55, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. ffm 17:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
John W. Lancaster
- John W. Lancaster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Absolutely no sources found. Only claims are that he's married to Rachel Proctor and that he played for a few notable artists. Notability is not inherited. (On top of that, I hate when people don't fill out the "background" field in {{Infobox Musical artist}}.) Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete in full agreement with TPH. I too did a search with numerous parameters. All I could find were clones of the Wiki article. Notability? Nope. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:03, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Wikipedia is not a resumé service. B.Wind (talk) 03:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. ~ L'Aquatique[talk] 02:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Adam Lewis
- Adam Lewis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
There are 1000's of Adam Lewis's in the world, and this Adam Lewis is very insignificant. He was in a band for 18 months, that hardly constitutes having a wikipedia page. Adamwlewis (talk) 19:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep. Other Adams Lewises including you are even less significant :-). Anyway; entertainment guys by the virtue of their occupation are more notable than an average joe. The notablity criterion is: what are the chances that people would like to read about this person. Answer: those interested of the band in question, which seems moderately notable. A reasonable solution would be merge/redirect into Breed 77, since there seems really nothing much to write. `'Míkka>t 20:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and delete Well, I actually beg to differ on me being less significant. I own one of the largest online scrapbooking websites in the world, Scrapo.com, and am profiled in 300-400 websites throughout the internet. Which is actually my point, I am quite a bit more well known and I would never consider having my own Wikipedia page. None of the other past members of Breed 77 have their own Wiki's: Lawrence Bautista, Nick Beefly, Charlie Gomez, Dan Wilkinson, Peter Chichone. It would be different if this Adam Lewis had a large profile with lots of information, but it is literally just 3 sentances. I agree with merging and deleting. Adamwlewis (talk) 20:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and delete Merge any info into Breed 77 and either delete or turn into a disambig page, as this individual isn't notable outside the band. PHARMBOY (TALK) 23:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Merge or redirect should only occur if "Breed 77" is actually shown to be important/significant itself. That article has many unsupported claims but, no reliable sourcing at present. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No claim of notability in the article, nor any real suggestion of it in Breed 77. Bongomatic (talk) 21:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Not notable outside of band. Mentioned in band page, no point in merging uncited "information" to damage that article.Yobmod (talk) 13:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Question out of curiosity does anyone know where the redirect that used to be at the page went to? Jasynnash2 (talk) 13:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment no clue, never saw it. it's always just been this weak page. (talk) 16:13, 10 Octover 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.62.250.60 (talk)
- Delete Not notable outside, or even really inside, the Breed77 band. Information not referenced and member is not in band anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.53.18.138 (talk) 21:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:50, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Withdrawn The CMT source is a good find, and has me convinced that there're probably more sources somewhere, just not on the 'net. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jonnie Barnett
- Jonnie Barnett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Reads more like a magazine article. Some notability but it seems very thin (wrote a hit for Clay Walker, a few other minor writing jobs, very very minor acting roles), and the sources don't seem to cut it. Most seem to be personal websites or trivial mentions. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:46, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mr.Z-man 03:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ugh, someone !vote already… Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:54, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - At first glance, subject appears to be somewhat notable. Article needs improvement, not baleetage. {{sofixit}}. [ roux ] [x] 16:55, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I did find this good source but that's the only RS I've found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 17:07, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- comment Not my field, but aside from 3 bit movie parts, he seems to have written one and only one notable song? DGG (talk) 04:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yep. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep substantial coverage in a biographical way cited. Passes N, therefor, at the least. WilyD 14:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 12:44, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oldominion
- Oldominion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Non-notable hip hop crew, fails WP:MUSIC -- lacks non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publications. JBsupreme (talk) 04:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment if deleted, redirect to Old Dominion as plausible typo 70.51.10.188 (talk) 05:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: its no typo. "Oldominion" is the spelling of the group's name. I cannot speak toward WP:Music, but my search found stuff on them. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Group has made no substantial contribution to hip-hop music and should therefore be deleted. Group has also not generated any significant media coverage (most sources trivial).
oldmic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.82.140 (talk) 05:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment My apologies for this relist. I was on the wrong log page --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 01:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Searching fails to bring up any non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 01:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - This article has few references, does not explain why the subject is notable, and is mostly lists of information (WP:TRIVIA). Nat682 (talk) 01:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - btw nothing from MySpace should be linked to from Wikipedia Nat682 (talk) 02:02, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Myspace is not notable--Freeway8 03:05, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 01:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The All-Girl Boys
- The All-Girl Boys (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
unsourced, only one release. No significant coverage in reliable sources found. Duffbeerforme (talk) 09:21, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No sources found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Chicks with Picks Sorry, just had to say that, as from the title alone, I couldn't tell it was about music... Unfortunately, bluegrass is a hard genre to source sometimes. It is an older demographic I suppose, but wp:v still applies and I couldn't find sources to show they were actually notable enough to pass wp:band. I even tried to dig up a bit on their 1997 "critically aclaimed" CD, Heart's Desire, but couldn't find anything that would remotely pass wp:rs. PHARMBOY (TALK) 00:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. kurykh 05:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jennifer Rush (1985 album)
- Jennifer Rush (1985 album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Don't know where this album came from, but it's not mentioned anywhere in any official site or any list of albums I've ever seen. The guy has added in a bunch of references taken from the Jennifer Rush (1984 album) page which do not relate to this album. It could just be a budget release cobbled together from 2 different albums.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 10:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Hoax album? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, if it looks like a hoax... RockManQ (talk) 21:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. kurykh 05:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Run (Rock band)
- Run (Rock band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Nonnotable band. Keep having to fix bad wikilinks by original author (see history) and deleting references that are Forums, etc. Being on the radio a little doesn't make you notable. I've tried to clean it up to see if it would be ok, but author keeps reverting to wikilink stuff improperly, etc. so I give up. PHARMBOY (TALK) 11:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. WP:BAND requires groups to be "in rotation nationally by any major radio network" to qualify via radio. This doesn't meet that or any of the others. tomasz. 12:21, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete
Actually, a band does not have to be "in rotation nationally by any major radio network" to qualify as notable, it can hit many of the other WP:MUSIC criteria but that (a great example of this is The Fall), butthis band does not meet any of the WP:MUSIC critereon and the articles only attempt at notability is a list of five or so radio stations that the band allegedly gets airplay on. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 14:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, a band does not have to be "in rotation nationally by any major radio network" to qualify as notable, it can hit many of the other WP:MUSIC criteria. Yes, that is why i wrote to qualify via radio. i.e. to qualify for notability status via the "radio play" criterion of WP:BAND (#11), which is the only one they come within a country mile of being able to claim. i also said the article doesn't meet "any of the others", i.e. any of the other 11 criteria of WP:BAND (#1 - 10 & 12). Please read again. Thank-you. tomasz. 15:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, right you are. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 15:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, a band does not have to be "in rotation nationally by any major radio network" to qualify as notable, it can hit many of the other WP:MUSIC criteria. Yes, that is why i wrote to qualify via radio. i.e. to qualify for notability status via the "radio play" criterion of WP:BAND (#11), which is the only one they come within a country mile of being able to claim. i also said the article doesn't meet "any of the others", i.e. any of the other 11 criteria of WP:BAND (#1 - 10 & 12). Please read again. Thank-you. tomasz. 15:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that being on the radio a little does not make a band notable. But the band was added to regular rotation on many stations, which meets the criteria for notability. Also fulfilling the criteria is the fact that the bands music was used repeatedly in two different network television programs Road Rules & Battle for Ozzfest. These aren't just claims... They are facts. Thanks for your consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.240.81.23 (talk) 18:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nothing is "fact" unless it is cited, and nothing is cited here. I reverted yet more bad wikilinks to boot. PHARMBOY (TALK) 18:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not here to argue with anyone. They are facts. I witnessed them. Wikipedias policies may restrict you from allowing the information if it's not properly cited, but that doesn't diminish the facts. I've personally heard the band played in regular rotation on these radio stations recently and many others while the band was on tour in 2005. Please consider that this is a nationally touring act as well (yet another of the notability requirements. That's 3 total, with only one being required). The write up in "Arizona" Weekly Entertainment Magazine about a "Los Angeles" band actually verifies that they are a nationally touring act. Darren Mercier —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darrenmercier (talk • contribs) 16:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You would do better to work within the guidelines here to try to keep the article, rather than using an emotional appeal (which is guaranteed to NOT work). A small amount of uncited material is allowed in an article for a while (thus, the reason the FACT tag exists) but in general, Original Research (your personal witnessing) isn't. You can easily shut everyone here up by simply providing enough verification using reliable sources. I never understand why people want to argue instead of just fixing the problem. If it can't be fixed, then that supports the idea of deleting. I probably save one or two articles per week that were overwhelmingly DELETE by first adding tons of citations, THEN saying something in the AFD about it, and watching others change their votes. Its called putting your money where your mouth is. PHARMBOY (TALK) 18:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. "Wikipedias policies may restrict you from allowing the information if it's not properly cited, but that doesn't diminish the facts". Exactly. So till proper cites appear (no sign yet), Wikipedia's policies do indeed restrict us from allowing it. Also the radio criterion doesn't fly as none of the quoted stations are national networks, and an article in a newspaper from a different state to the one the band are from doesn't come within a country mile of proving they have toured nationally. tomasz. 16:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Also note a "Darren Mercier" is the band's bassist. Tho' it could be someone else of that name, of course. tomasz. 16:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the observation. I am the bassist. I'm not trying win anyone over with emotions. I don't understand how these facts could be more credible if they are coming straight from the source. Still, I don't need sympathy. But I simply don't know what you mean by "citations". I'm not here looking for free advertising. I would love to substantiate these facts for you. Problem is, I'm a musician and probably not as computer savvy as any of you. Perhaps I can have our record label, lawyer and management company send letters verifying these facts. Our first album is signed to a nationwide distribution deal with Sony/BMG. If I can verify this is it cool? But then we're back to me not knowing how to "cite" it. If you can ellaborate on how to properly "cite" these facts, I'll be happy to comply. I've read the policies but simply don't know where to begin. Thanks for your input. I look forward to getting it straightened out. Darren Mercier (The bass player) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.240.81.23 (talk) 00:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The article really should be written by an independent, third party. As it stands right now, your participation to this point violates Wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest and also is strong evidence that this article is an advertisement. It adds more justification for deletion. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 00:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This is why Wikipedia requires that the article is written by someone NOT in the band. You may mean well, but you also have information that is not written anywhere and can't be verified. All encyclopedia material must be verifiable. One of the basic tenents of Wikipedia is that we are not interested in TRUTH, we are interested in that which can be VERIFIED by independent parties (news papers, reputable internet sites, etc.) It is a core principal. PHARMBOY (TALK) 01:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for a very clear understanding. Ignorance is no excuse but it was all I had. Perhaps the information will be submitted by an independant when some of the facts are a bit easier to cite. Sorry for being a thorn in anyones side. Remove at will. Darren Mercier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.240.81.23 (talk) 05:05, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep. The article seems to have just been created 5 days ago. Understandably the creation of the article by a band member brings up questions however many Wikipedia articles seem to have been started by people close to the subject and at some point they either take on a life of their own or are deleted. Five days seems too short to allow any article to grow, no matter who may have started it.Soundvisions1 (talk) 19:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 10:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ballyhoo! (band)
- Ballyhoo! (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- Non-notable band per WP:MUSIC. tomasz. 12:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: I think it is notable enough, read this [8] and you may agree. Jared Wiltshire (talk) 08:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Cmt. sorry, but i don't think that amounts to anything more than a puff piece (non-reliable source) and i can't see anything to meet any of the WP:BAND 12 in there. tomasz. 08:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Notes a small fanbase; cites many influences, but no tours or other ways to satisfy WP:BAND. Lastingsmilledge (talk) 03:33, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment My apologies for this relist. I was on the wrong log page. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, article, and the 2 albums, fail to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 05:42, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 07:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Non notable per WP:MUSIC. Eatabullet (talk) 08:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Keep. Synergy 04:14, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pathosray
- Pathosray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Band fails WP:MUSIC. Most recent album was released by a non-notable label. Others were self released. No refs to support notability. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 17:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The band's album was released by Sensory Records and references can be found on http://www.lasercd.com/
Sensory is a well know publisher within the scene.
Panzerschrek076 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panzerschreck076 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Deleteunless reliable sources are found. There are a couple of reviews online, mostly positive, but not in what I'd call reliable sources. I can't judge Sensory Records' notability, but the band fails the "two or more albums" criterion of WP:MUSIC anyway. Huon (talk) 20:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:09, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, passes WP:MUSIC#C1. In the context of their genre, I feel the references stand up. Here's an Allmusic.com one too just to fill it out a little more. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 01:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is some notability--heavy metal is not blessed with a plethora of printed magazines or independent journals. The Aardschok reference is plenty reliable, and some of the others should be ranked a bit higher than merely fanzines or blogs. Drmies (talk) 04:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stones (rapper)
- Stones (rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Commenters beware, this article is deceptively referenced. The artist in question fails WP:MUSIC and lacks non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publications. Blogs, youtube, myspace, et cetera are not acceptable sources for biographies of living people. JBsupreme (talk) 18:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: Biography section removed as a copy/paste of this. Jennavecia (Talk) 18:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am the creator of the article in question and feel like I am being treated unfair. I understand that Wikipedia frowns upon copyright law violations but at the same time I frown upon being accuse as a law-breaker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HipHopDoc (talk • contribs) 19:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete--no notability that can be independently verified--just blogs, MySpace, etc. Drmies (talk) 00:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete fails a number of WP:MUSIC criteria as well as the more general notability and verifiability ones. Jasynnash2 (talk) 12:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Couldn't find any evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources. Given that the creator of the article is fairly new to Wikipedia, however, I think some of the comments towards them have been a little WP:BITEy.--Michig (talk) 20:17, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Daniel (talk) 00:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
DJ Sharpnel
- DJ Sharpnel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Also nominating:
Artists fail WP:MUSIC - no assertion of notability, and their music is self-published. None of the references qualify as WP:RS. Recommend Delete. // Chris (complaints)•(contribs) 23:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree with delete--totally self-published, without any independent verification of importance this is little more than a description of a hobby. Drmies (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete fails wp:music, self pub, editors above pretty much summed it up. PHARMBOY (TALK) 01:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as no notability outside their own minds. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Both for failing WP:MUSIC as well as the more general WP:N and WP:V. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:47, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 04:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Daybreak (folk)
- Daybreak (folk) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Fails A7 = "An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." Also fails all twelve notability criteria for musicans and ensembles outlined as per WP:BAND. Article also fails to list any sources, references or citations. Alphageekpa (talk) 13:37, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ffm 18:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:37, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - It's probably too late for a speedy tag, but this band does not appear notable. They are not signed with a major label. No reliable sources provided, none found. TN‑X-Man 13:48, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 15:46, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tree (The Folk Experience)
- Tree (The Folk Experience) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Nonnotable organiation set in a college in September 2008. Too early for glory, I say. Twri (talk) 15:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Jll (talk) 17:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, indeed. Drmies (talk) 19:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 08:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
David James (singer)
- David James (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Appears to be a somewhat blatant advertisement; not notable. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 12:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I can't see any significant coverage or anything that would satisfy WP:MUSIC. It says on his official Myspace bio that his last album was produced in his mother's basement and that he mainly plays in clubs in LA. This doesn't give me hope that substantial independent coverage is out there. Bill (talk|contribs) 12:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Emphatic delete. This isn't even close - two download-only albums? Nothing else, no tours, no WP:MUSIC. B.Wind (talk) 03:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. - 68.183.55.64 (talk) 09:15, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 08:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anthony M.
- Anthony M. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Blatant advertisment; not notable; suspect COI violation. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 12:46, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for reasons mentioned by nominator.--Boffob (talk) 14:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. - 68.183.55.64 (talk) 09:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was no consensus. Stifle (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC) keep —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.5.83 (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alissa Musto
- Alissa Musto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Fails WP:MUSIC. Has won a regional talent show, but that wouldn't be considered major. Was on a national show, but didn't do well. No refs support notability. Only PR refs. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 13:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP-This page shouldn't be deleted. Is being on a National television Show not a good enough reason to have a wikipedia page? I have seen"stubs" about kids that maybe had a small role in one film an they get a page? This girl has a large resume and deserves a page. Even though she didn't win the national competition she was choosen to shoot a commercial for the show and won 3rd overall.
-Amy
- Comment - Per WP:Notability, needs to "has [sic] received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Of the four references listed on the article only one is actually about her (and her family, the projo.com one). Also, the "there's other articles worse than this" thing doesn't work on Wikipedia, sorry. --RazorICE 13:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:MUSIC and WP:N.--Boffob (talk) 14:54, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Notable as a child prodigy. While she may fail Wikipedia:Notability (music), she satisfies Wikipedia:Notability (people). The links at the bottom of the page support a short article. Fred Talk 16:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Fred above. Matt Deres (talk) 00:47, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Unlike Fred I see nothing in WP:Notability (people) that justifies inclusion. There's been no major awards, and nothing to indicate independent notability - the contests are themselves of questionable notability, but even if they are, they do not in themselves confer notability upon the contestants (WP:BIO1E). Right now this subject has had their 15 minutes of (relatively insignificant) fame; if this is as far as it gets then long-term there is no value in the article. Per WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:CRYSTAL we should wait and see whether notability is established; for now the article is premature. Ros0709 (talk) 22:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 08:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Dorques
- The Dorques (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Non-notable band that hasn't even released an album yet and basically just plays at bars and malls. CyberGhostface (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Home made CD-Rs, Myspace links, a Trivia section, "known for their lively performance". Probably nice guys, granted, but not enough of anything for an article. fails wp:music PHARMBOY (TALK) 19:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not notable. sheesh Clubmarx (talk) 22:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 08:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dark Crescent
- Dark Crescent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Bands fails WP:MUSIC by virtue of having one self-released record and no non-trivial coverage in third party sources. Speedy tag removed by author. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not notable, no sources, delete! Clubmarx (talk) 22:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete. No evidence of meeting WP:BAND, no citation of reliable sources. Article appears to be a critical essay as opposed to a NPOV overview of the group. B.Wind (talk) 02:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 08:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alexis Pelekanos
- Alexis Pelekanos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
At first glance this is essentially a vanity article about an unsuccessful competitor on a TV reality show. I thought about CSD(A7), but the article does make a weak assertion of notability, and according to a Google search she has some exposure. Whether enough to meet WP:BIO, however... I have my doubts. EyeSerenetalk 20:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 21:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 21:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete being a contestant on a reality show doesn't mean that deserves an article. Clubmarx (talk) 22:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Clubmarx. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 23:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Given that the article has no references, and exists mainly to promote her web site, CSD#G11 would have been appropriate. VG ☎ 13:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Notability not established Dreamspy (talk) 20:46, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: WP:NOTE,WP:V,WP:REF Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 22:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 08:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nate Grapes
- Nate Grapes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NM, non-notable person that asserts no notability and has no substantial third-party coverage DiverseMentality(Boo!) 21:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What do you not like about the article. He is a relevant person, he is known around the Bay Area. There is plenty of sources to back up all the statements in the article. I have put links on there that back up these statements. I do not understand why it is proposed for deletion.
Sources: http://www.nbc11.com/newsarchive/16279733/detail.html http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=236320115
Nate Grapes and Nathaniel Curtis Freeman are the same person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnmhorn (talk • contribs) 21:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.
--Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Please read WP:RS. MySpace and YouTube are not reliable sources, as well as the other sources you've listed. DiverseMentality(Boo!) 03:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. Even if reliable sources were found for the claims, local notability does not equate with wikipedia-notability.Yobmod (talk) 10:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i think NBC is. He is very well known.Why would you delete the whole article when there are news articles to prove the statements in the article. I have many many articles that would back the fact that he is a murderer but only CD covers and others for his rapping. I have his music and things along those lines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.195.42 (talk) 06:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:42, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:MUSIC. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 19:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 20:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - falls short of the WP:MUSIC notability bar. His being charged with a murder that has received only local mention doesn't make up the difference. The article itself makes only a weak assertion of notability - this must be changed if the article is to survive. B.Wind (talk) 03:09, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
can you guys help me find more sources then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.195.156 (talk) 19:33, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- question Where is the article link? How are people checking the sources without it? I'm ocnfused!Yobmod (talk) 10:47, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was redirect to Idol 2008. Stifle (talk) 08:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anna Bergendahl
- Anna Bergendahl (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Non-notable person, fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC. --TheLeftorium 15:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete just because you are on a tv show doesn't make you notable Clubmarx (talk) 22:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:04, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above AlwaysOnion (talk) 15:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Idol 2008, the reality program on which she is currently a contestant. B.Wind (talk) 02:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fry (Band)
- Fry (Band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Appears to be a strictly local bar band, with no released recordings or other accomplishments that might satisfy the requirements of WP:BAND. Nature of name makes on-line searching difficult, but Google and Google News searches for "Fry band Swindon" don't turn up anything looking like reliable sources. The information in the "Band Members" section is a copy-and-paste reproduction of the bios linked from the photograph here. Deor (talk) 13:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Deor (talk) 14:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - does not meet the requirements of WP:BAND. JohnCD (talk) 15:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no released albums, no secondary sources. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 15:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Wikipedia is not MySpace doktorb wordsdeeds 16:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - bordering on speedy delete territory (A7) as there is no assertion of notability. In addition, there's that copyvio problem mentioned by Deor above. B.Wind (talk) 02:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 09:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tara Chand (musician)
- Tara Chand (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable musician, fails WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC Ecoleetage (talk) 00:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per nom. Does not have significant coverage by independent reliable sources, no evidence of passing WP:MUSIC or WP:BIO. Nsk92 (talk) 01:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 11:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 13:23, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rostislaw Wygranienko
- Rostislaw Wygranienko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability not established through reliable sources. Wizardman 04:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 10:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Has been tagged as unreferenced for over a year, so notability cannot be established. Unless there are some sources that show why the article is notable, it should be deleted.--Terrillja (talk) 01:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Delete. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 13:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Los Narcos de S.L.P
- Los Narcos de S.L.P (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Non-notable band, fails WP:MUSIC. Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 09:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 00:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 09:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A Girl Called Kate
- A Girl Called Kate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
The article has an impressive list of artists the band has performed with so I am no going to go with {{db-band}} on this one but in all other aspects this band appears unnotable.
It gets three mentions in news sources (as determined by GoogleNews; [9]) but none of the mentions exceed one sentence and contain essentially no information about the band and the bands only release so far, an EP titled "This Is All She Gave Us", appears to be a minor release ([10]) to say the least. Icewedge (talk) 00:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 09:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not notable. --Walmwutter (talk) 09:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete questionable notability and poorly written articles. --Da Vynci (talk) 19:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - there seem to be some assertion of notability, but without sourcing for verification, this will be An Article Called Deleted. B.Wind (talk) 03:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 09:05, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Vonn
- Vonn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Dismally fails WP:MUSIC and WP:RS. The site Doom-metal.com that is mentioned in the opening paragraph is strictly a fanboy endeavour -- copious levels of genuine media coverage are acutely lacking. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete We can't find their CDs and we don't know who's in the band? // Chris (complaints)•(contribs) 02:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 09:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:MUSIC, band has one self-released album to their name. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:MUSIC, one self-released album (although they did self-release it twice). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know if I am doing this right because this was my first page for wikipedia.
The reason I added the band Vonn as my first page - and why I felt they were noteworthy in wikipedia - is that I felt they truly summed up the essence of what extreme doom metal is, with its obscurity, extremity, and the fact that the band refuse to do interviews, be properly identified or conduct interviews. I am a journalist and we tried to get an interview with the band by going through one of the larger bands that the members are in, but they refused. Also the fact that reviews of the album all cite the music as the most extreme music the reviewers have heard, one of the reasons we wanted to interview them. I therefore thought a wikipedia page would be appropriate. Anyway, if it's not deemed worthy of inclusion, so be it. No big deal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SabenaSB (talk • contribs) 18:46, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 09:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Scarlet Fade
- Scarlet Fade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Not notable; author's discussion on talk page amounts to same AndrewHowse (talk) 02:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Very weak keep Despite my personal point of view of Christian bands, I was torn on this one. I think notability can be said to be borderline, when reviewing the contest won and some mentions of that fact in multiple sources. I tend to support weak keep, but I think it needs to be cleansed of all the fan-speak and suchlike mentions. Imho it would benefit us more to keep it for now, but I admit that my arguments not much stronger than the creator's. SoWhy 08:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 09:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I'm not seeing how the band meets any of the 12 basic criteria for WP:MUSIC. I don't see the Ellio's Pizza Rock Star Challenge Online as a "major music competition." None of the sources provided move beyond "trivial coverage" IMO. The author states on the talk page that his main source of info about the band is "the band". Perhaps in a couple years we could try again. - IceCreamAntisocial (talk) 17:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- the article is notable. Im the creator, and let me just say, i believe the article, unfortunatley, doesn't fully meet all of the 12 basic criteria. HOWEVER, I personally feel that the Ellio's Pizza Rock Star Challenge is a pretty major music competition. Not only did over 53,000 people vote (well, more because that was only the amount of people who voted for Scarlet Fade), but you have to consider the following: the contest in question was for indie bands. You have to understand that indie bands are a much smaller piece of the music world than signed artists. So, when it comes to it, the 53,000+ people are a small percentage in the category of "music", but a larger percentage of the category of "indie music". To be honest, I knew about the contest back in 2006, when it first started. In fact, my whole town (and all the bands in it, and all the bands in towns around us) knew about it. No offense, but maybe it wasn't notable to you guys. However, to a lot of people, it was. I would also like to add that, while the article doesn't fully meet any of the other criterias for notability, it does partially meet several. For example, one piece of criteria is that the band, "Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network." While the band hasn't been included nationally as far as I know, they have been included on local stations and statewide stations (i think one was 96.5 TIC - http://www.965tic.com). Another piece of criteria that the band partially meets is that they, "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)." The band has released 1 single and 1 album, so they obviously havent released 2 albums yet, but if you consider a single an album, then we're good. NOT TO MENTION that the band fully fits the criteria that they, "[Have] become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability." The band, which originated in Bristol, CT, is well known in their town, and even in other towns in Connecticut (such as mine). The band is so well known that my friend's old-er relatives (perhaps great aunt or grandmother; i dont know exactly) who lives in Bristol has heard of them. I know they are somewhat well known, and i wish that you would respect that. The band has been an influence for other bands, and i want a source for people to go to when they want to find information about the band (not to advertise, obviously; i was sure to not do that).
--[Email address removed] 00:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Comment I don't pay attention to music much, but to reply to "the article is notable" — Have the song and the CD been issued on any of these major labels? If not, it fails that criterion, regardless of whether the separate song is considered a separate album. Just like politicians — although national and regional significance can make the music group and the elected official notable, simply local significance (whether being played on local stations or holding local elected office) doesn't make the subject notable. Finally, as to the city: I would guess that this refers to really large cities, probably larger than Bristol; if it meant ANY city, then a four-person band from Ruso, North Dakota would obviously be the most prominent representative of that city's cultural scene, but that wouldn't mean much. Ultimately, to be notable under the WP:MUSIC criteria to which you refer, it must fully pass one or more of the notability criteria; passing them partially isn't enough. Nyttend (talk) 04:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - fails WP:BAND; a non-notable band on a non-notable label. B.Wind (talk) 03:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 19:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Never Heard of It
- Never Heard of It (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Article about an unsigned band. The article contains some assertions of notability (numbers of CD) but they are not supported by any reliable sources (short blurbs in directories and self-published info only). Falls far from WP:MUSIC, and fails verifiability. — Coren (talk) 05:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete no reliable sources about this band CTJF83Talk 06:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sigh. While I hate to say it about a band whose music I've got on my iPod, I've just spent an hour trying to dig up sources for the international touring and so forth. The closest I've been able to get to reaching WP:MUSIC is that they won an Electronic Arts competition in 2007 that I can't find much of anything else about. Beyond that, unfortunately, nothing. Emo delete. Tony Fox (arf!) 07:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 09:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete. There are plenty of assertions of notability and plenty of sources out there to support them. Problem is, none seem to satisfy WP:RS. I'm sure there's gonna be some out there somewhere, just a case of finding them! Unless any can be found, I can't really see the article staying. Nouse4aname (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:MUSIC. Unsigned band. The primary claim here is their claimed number of CD sales, but when examined that doesn't hold up: it says that's their total number of sales, and divided by the 7 releases mentioned it averages out to less thn 3% of what they'd need to have a gold record in the US. And even that weak claim isn't sourced, nor is anything else in the article. Note that the article says they're split/defunct, and while that certainly isn't cause to delete on its own it also means no additional notability is forthcoming. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete A bit off-key in regard to WP:MUSIC. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:21, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
J. D. Cronise
- J. D. Cronise (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
No decent information, all claims which can be challenged. No information readily available. Andre666 (talk) 07:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 09:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, treelo radda 00:12, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to The Sword. I see him mentioned plenty within the band, but no individual notability outside, no solo interviews, etc. PHARMBOY (TALK) 00:48, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 00:48, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. There are no reliable sources to speak of. JBsupreme (talk) 04:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per the nom, as a non-plausible search term. Fails to establish notability outside of the band per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 12:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was redirect to The Quarrymen. Nothing there to merge, really. Stifle (talk) 09:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Dissenters
- The Dissenters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Despite initial enthusiasm for any article related to the Beatles, it appears from the paucity of sources that "The Dissenters" was not a functioning group, and certainly not a musical group. It was a nickname they gave themselves but they were never a notable functioning entity. Propose deleting and merging into the articles on the "members" and the pub that bears the plaque.. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not a notable group CTJF83Talk 06:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and merge per nom: this is less than a stub-class even, lacking sources etc. Could be easily added to pertinent articles as an additional note. ColdmachineTalk 07:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge content to The Quarrymen, assuming that there are WP:RS for that content. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If merged, add a hatnote to Quarrymen about dissenters. Nyttend (talk) 03:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge An afternoon booze-up idea. Not anywhere near enough for an article.--andreasegde (talk) 14:23, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Coren 23:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Derek Deakins
- Derek Deakins (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
No sources found. Only assertation of notability is that he has played for other artists, but notability is not inherited. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:56, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Copied from talk page: "I think side man musicians are important in documenting any kind of music. Derek has played with two well-known groups in country music. I think there need to be more articles on sidemen because they are the ones that make the big stars sound good and nobody ever knows who they are unless you can read about them somewhere." Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unsourced and unreferenced --Dreamspy (talk) 19:26, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fix article and restart AFD Something has messed up the article so the references are hidden, but, they're there - edit it and you see them. I wasn't able to fix it, maybe an admin must do it. Till then anyone who claims it is unreferenced should be disregarded, since, the references are present but not showing up properly. Felisse (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 20:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 21:59, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete--I agree with the nominator. Tone and most of the content already aren't appropriate, but there is also a lack of notability. Drmies (talk) 22:57, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. MBisanz talk 01:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Cardboards
- The Cardboards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Taking this to AfD rather than prod because this may be a case where sources will be pre-intertoobs. Claims of notability are iffy: early band in Pittsburgh punk scene and pioneers of a technique of unknown notability. One album released, no claims of charting or awards. No entry at allmusic, no reviews found at metacritic. Gsearch turns up tons of false positives, and my googlefu isn't narrowing it down well enough. Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I was a student at Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh from 1980 to 1983 and I saw them perform numerous times and I loved this band. It was a very original band which was at the same time very much of the moment, and it belongs in any history of punk rock and new wave music. Not everything interesting happens in New York. Erxnmedia (talk) 16:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:MUSIC. Appears to also have been deleted before. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete no evidence they pass WP:MUSIC. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:10, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep – I've added one reference that helps to verify a little of the article content: that the band was part of the early Pittsburgh punk scene, that the drummer was the subject of a documentary, and that members went on to be part of The Cynics and Hector in Paris (oops, that one is a red link at the moment). Like the nominator, I am cautious when it is a band that likely would have had most of its press coverage pre-Internet. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was merge all to Panic at the Disco. lifebaka++ 00:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Brendon Urie
- Brendon Urie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- Ryan Ross (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Spencer Smith (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Jon Walker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Brent Wilson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
None of the members of this band appear to be notable outside of the band. A previous AFD (from 2 years ago) was closed as keep with "any unsourced biographies should be redirected to the Panic! at the Disco article and then expanded out as proper references can be provided". Each of these articles have about a paragraph's worth or less of sourced content with the rest being a history of the band. A redirect seems to be the only logical conclusion. I thought that, given the length of time since the last AFD, that I would go for fresh consensus instead of redirecting boldly. If your !vote is not the same for all five articles, please specify —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 20:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 20:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose straight redirects. Merge the relevant information, certainly, although I can see arguments in favor of letting Brent Wilson and Brendon Urie standing alone. I'd suggest that next time it might not be neccesary to bring this to afd, at least not until the d stands for discussion rather than deletion. Hiding T 20:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You're right, of course. By "redirect", I meant to merge any verifiable and sourced notable content to the band's article and then redirect the members' articles to the band's. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 20:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect all Per nom. they are not all clearly noteworthy except for being in the band. Hance the best place for info on them is in the bands page - this will help readers, which is the point of an encylopedia, rather than massage egos. Unreferenced biographies are strongly against policy an "should be deleted on sight" - why are they allowed to stand here?Yobmod (talk) 13:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I still think they are all noteworthy. And besides, this is an encyclopedia and people come on here to look them up and learn what they can about them. Don't you all think we're jumping the gun a little to delete people from band's pages nowadays?--Bottle-Of-Musical-Joy (talk) 23:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One !vote per person, please. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 23:40, 8 October 2008 (UTC)(User deleted other !vote)[reply]- comment. why do you think they are note-worthy? You have secret sources that you are keeping from the article? They are not being deleted from the band's pages - most votes are to include then into the bands pages.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Yobmod (talk • contribs) 13:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge. They are not notable beyond the band and are subject to little editing other than vandalism. Merge all and protect the redirects to the band article. JBsupreme (talk) 18:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was no consensus. Stifle (talk) 09:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dora (singer)
- Dora (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. In 1986 she was 14th with Não sejas mau para mim and two years later she was 18th with Voltarei. Schuym1 (talk) 20:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom due to the issue of reliable sourcing. I will check back on this debate periodically to see if anyone can locate documents to demonstrate the notability of the subject. coccyx bloccyx(toccyx) 17:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - She has represented Portugal twice as noted in the article, and confirmed from the Eurovision particpation history for Portugal. Dora, as a name makes it hard (nearly impossible) to search via google, and I suspect that most sourcing would be inPortuguese which I cannot read. -- Whpq (talk) 21:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Twice represented her country at the Eurovision Song Contest and not notable? Let's use a bit of WP:COMMONSENSE here. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Seems the page has had the same two sentence description since April 2006. A look at Eurovision Song Contest 1986 shows a list of the top 20 and lists Dora as number 20, not 14 (Confirmed by the official website as well) and for 1988 she was again 20, not 18([http://www.eurovision.tv/index/main?page=66&event=304 official). Either way Dora would still be included on that page, there is no need to keep a two line article.
- Comment. That's untrue. Those references confirm that she was placed 14th and 18th - 20 is simply the draw number. It's the column on the right that you need to look at, not the one on the left. But anyway she's notable for representing a country in the contest, not for the position she gained. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: My bad. I see that. But I still stick to delete as a two line article is weak. Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. And since when has being a two line article been a reason for turning it into a zero line article? This needs expansion, not deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment:I am all for any article being expanded upon however the topic here is not expansion it is "should it be deleted." I said "Seems the page has had the same two sentence description since April 2006" and I make my choice on that. Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 19:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oleg Gurtovoy
- Oleg Gurtovoy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
A second rate electronic music composer and leader of a band that according to its website has not released an album yet. Fails WP:MUSIC. Blacklake (talk) 20:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Being second rate is not a reason for deletion (or half of Wikpedia has to go!). However, lack of notabilty is. Delete Emeraude (talk) 11:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete there do not appear to be any reliable sources which could be used to create a verifiable, encyclopaedia article about the subject. Guest9999 (talk) 02:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete fails WP:MUSIC and WP:RS. X MarX the Spot (talk) 03:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete It is not nice to call someone "second rate" -- but problems with WP:RS and WP:BIO cannot be ignored. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Wizardman 12:27, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tempest & the Diaspora
- Tempest & the Diaspora (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails to assert notability. No Google News hits that mention the subject. Also, the article is written like an essay. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no reliable sources covering this. The sourcing int he article only gives out a magazine name. Assuming I got the right website for the magazines, searches on keyboard magazine, electronic musician magazine, and Metal Edge magazine web sites could not find any hits for Tempest & the Diaspora or on Scottie Owens. -- Whpq (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 03:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per verifiability probems and lack of reliable sources. The article doesn't establish notability and neither do multiple Google searches for sources. This definitely fails WP:BAND. Cunard (talk) 06:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 14:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ricardo Sanchez (music)
- Ricardo Sanchez (music) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No particular evidence of notability for Sanchez or his album Unmerited. Biruitorul Talk 02:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 16:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 02:35, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- VG ☎ 03:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Given the number of times this has been relisted it could have been prodded and nobody would have noticed. Also, Google is hopeless for finding sources due to US Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez. VG ☎ 04:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Couldn't find any sources when I checked the internet. Eatabullet (talk) 13:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 12:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rikitiki & Merendeque
- Rikitiki & Merendeque (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:MUSIC. I can't find any legitimate news sources that mentions this duo. The only hits I get via Google are for MySpace, YouTube, and other video sites. Pinkadelica (talk) 06:48, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. As I noted on the talk page, selling your music via Amazon does not equate to automatic notability. That said, not only are there notability concerns, but also verifiability. The article cites no non-blog sources. I would reconsider if independent reliable sources were found; however, in the current condition, the article fails both the notability and verifiability requirements. —C.Fred (talk) 03:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Lack of reliable sources --Megaboz (talk) 02:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom & above. JBsupreme (talk) 04:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not even famous or popular on youtube. I clicked one of the linked videos at random at it had some 2000 or so views. In a community where a 10-second clip of a sleepy kitten might get 10 million views, 2000 views is absolutely nothing at all. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 15:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cake Bake Betty
- Cake Bake Betty (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infinity Cat Recordings. G4 or not? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, WP:Music specifies that if a band has had a publication in a notable magazine or other publication. Cake Bake Betty had an article written on it by SUPERSWEET a notable magazine. Also toured with Be Your Own Pet a notable band. Clearly fits WP:Music under these two points. --St.daniel Talk 15:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've never heard of either SUPERSWEET or Be Your Own Pet, let alone Cake Bake Betty BMW(drive) 23:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- With all due respect I doubt that I've heard of every notable band that exists in the world but that does not nessecarily effect their notability --St.daniel Talk 23:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 20:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I acknowledge the above. It was more of a rhetorical comment in the grand scheme of things. I still say delete due to lack of notability, which I have spent a couple of days trying to determine BMW(drive) 20:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, again. Same reasons as last time. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 00:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete--very POVy, not very well written--and Supersweet itself is nominated for deletion. Drmies (talk) 00:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. kurykh 05:27, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Insense
- Insense (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Non-notable metal-core band from Norway. No refs and misses WP:MUSIC by miles. Delete. SIS 22:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I do not see how the band is notable, especially without any cites. This reads like a rockumentary. XF Law talk at me 09:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral The article is pretty dire at the moment. Nothing has been done to it for over a year. This not my field at all, but if you search for Norwegian results on Google , quite a lot comes up. "Mainstream" results include:
- feature on TV 2 (Norway) web site
- Aftenposten - some mentions, eg. [11], [12]
- 15 concert listings between 2004 and 2006 on NRK
- Review of "Silent Epidemic CD in Dagbladet
- Insense official web site
- I have no idea about specialised labels in this genre but they have at least two albums with Devil Doll Records, a label mentioned in several WP articles, e.g. Toilet Böys, Sonny Vincent, Dying Fetus, Half Man (band), The Napoleon Blownaparts (although for all I know, those groups may not be notable either). They also record for Black Balloon Records and Candlelight Records. Voceditenore (talk) 10:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC) Update. I've copy-edited and formatted the article and added a few external links/sources. I remain neutral as I don't know enough about the genre or the notability guidelines for it to judge. Voceditenore (talk) 11:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 04:09, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. MBisanz talk 01:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Take A Worm For A Walk Week
- Take A Worm For A Walk Week (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
Ok, a little weak but there are some assertions of notability. Having an album mixed by Iain Cook and a split album with DeSalvo (see Idlewild (band)) and another split CD probably isn't enough for notability. If the band members were connected, ok, but split albums probably don't qualify. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 04:12, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete already. No sources, no real notable releases. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for failing to meet notability guidelines for musicians. Includes absolutely zero secondary sources. OBM | blah blah blah 15:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral – The only source I could find was this article in Metro UK. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was no consensus. Stifle (talk) 13:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Phil Free
- Phil Free (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:MUSIC policy on bandmembers Ironholds 02:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 08:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Crass is not expanded before debate's end. Keep if an adequate expansion is made. -R. fiend (talk) 19:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 04:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or Merge. The band itself is barely notable (no hits at all on the official UK Charts), but probably just about - certainly non notable individual members.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 11:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, kurykh 05:27, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Crstyle the Great
The result was delete. The actual discussion has been hidden from view but can still be accessed by following the "history" link at the top of the page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.Bands & musicians Proposed deletions
To check articles which are being proposed for deletion search by date at Category:Proposed deletion or see the summary of PRODs at User:DumbBOT/ProdSummary. It is common to bands and musicians of all kinds listed.
- Cause The Product (via WP:PROD on 15 June 2008)
Bands and musicians Templates for deletion
- Template:Editors bandEditors band – Editors band ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )