Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bat For Lashes

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. ---J.S ^(T/C) 01:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bat For Lashes

Bat For Lashes (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Fails WP:MUSIC. ShadowHalo 23:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep. This is a significant new up-and-coming artist in the UK, with reviews and other coverage in newspapers, magazines and major online music sites. StoptheDatabaseState 00:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment Could you provide some examples? All I see are two reviews. As far as "up-and-coming", that's quite difficult to verify and just seems like WP:CRYSTAL. ShadowHalo 00:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Examples of external mentions of 'Bat For Lashes' (Natasha Khan): BBC review, Guardian Arts review, The Argus review, Pitchfork Media, NME. Are these insufficient to pass WP:MUSIC criterion 1? They have also played around 20 live shows in Britain and Europe in 2006 (Bat For Lashes website), headlining at significant venues e.g. The Spitz (criterion 4). StoptheDatabaseState 09:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

*Delete - WP:BAND, etc. Non-notable. --Wooty Woot? contribs 02:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Could you expand on "etc"? Navou ^talk 03:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Meets first criterion of WP:MUSIC based on the sources provided by User:StoptheDatabaseState. —ShadowHalo 20:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. --Wooty Woot? contribs 10:08, 14 December 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.