Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fortunate Sons

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. - Mailer Diablo 00:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Fortunate Sons

Unsigned band, no recordings, only link to myspace article. Camillus (talk) 00:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Very few unsigned bands meet WP:MUSIC notability standards, including this one. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

• delete Not a notable band. Tony P 00:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non notable -AMK152 01:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete, tagged with db-band. —dustmite 02:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:MUSIC. Michael 02:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete More like an advertisement, doesn't meet notability.

• Comment: Speedy is a bit unfair if someone can come up with a good reason for it not being deleted, there's no point going to DRV about this after the fact, but I won't contest it as nobody's objected (then again, its only been a few hours). --Draicone ^(talk) 06:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete per nom. If someone could come up with a good reason for it not being deleted, then speedy deletion would be unfair. Unfortunately for The Fortunate Sons, that's not likely to be the case. WP:NN, WP:MUSIC, WP:VAIN, WP:SPAM, etc. --S0uj1r0 07:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, not a speedy though since notability is asserted per Radio Scotland etc. quotes. I removed the speedy tag, no need to run two deletion processes in parallel. ~ trialsanderrors 08:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. AdamBiswanger1_{R.I.P. Steve Irwin} 13:46, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Unsigned bands are only notable if they've generated media buzz for some reason. I might be more inclined to vote keep if the quotes about the band were sourced, but as it is I really don't see anything to convince me of notability. -Elmer Clark 21:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment this band may meet WP:MUSIC's "[h]as been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network". I'm unable to determine how long their live set on BBC Radio Scotland was, but in a programme that runs 1 hour 55 minutes, it may well have been >=30 mins. That would two vague claims to notability then. No gig reviews found though in the papers though, which isn't a good sign. Don't see how it can be verifiable beyond the trivial fact of their existence unless there's a transcript of the radio appearance out there. Definitely not a candidate for speedy deletion. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

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.