Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cobaye Molotov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Cobaye Molotov

[Reformatting for clarity by Jerzy(t) 03:57, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC).]

Vanity. Neutralitytalk 07:07, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

  • keep: emerging band this band is starting to get recognition no google hit but that's normal, they are not a net-savy band( beside the guitar player they dont even have computeers themselves, very old school type of band in that regard but they got a blog and a message board, but their crowd is mostly street punks and poor people with non net connnection, so pretty inactive on the web keep --tb 08:10, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)tba03
    • They, or we? The only contributions of User:Tba03 have been to this VfD, this article, and its discussion page, where his comment was headed someone did a page on my band. I wish you well, Tba03, but you need to put out a lengthy CD (let's say forty minutes or more, and sold through conventional channels), or show evidence of vigorous activity in concerts, or some other notability. Can you point to any concert reviews in the Montréal press that are on the web? If not, or until then, it's delete. -- Hoary 10:52, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  • Del. They, or we? The only contributions of User:Tba03 have been to this VfD, this article, and its discussion page, where his comment was headed someone did a page on my band. I wish you well, Tba03, but you need to put out a lengthy CD (let's say forty minutes or more, and sold through conventional channels), or show evidence of vigorous activity in concerts, or some other notability. Can you point to any concert reviews in the Montréal press that are on the web? If not, or until then, it's delete. -- Hoary 10:52, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  • Del. "i'm a fan of this new emerging band and i'd like the world to know them thst's why i created the article..." Wait for them to emerge. Delete. --Zarquon 10:28, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Vanity. — Asbestos | Talk 11:30, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete; seems too obscure to keep for now; an entire good (as judged by me) album released under a creative commons license and downloadable from one of the creative commons sites would be sufficient for me to change my vote. It doesn't have to be distributed through conventional means. Also, concert reviews wouldn't have to be on the web to be convincing. Mozzerati 12:40, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  • delete Guys, wrong way. Amke a blog, publish a fotolog. Home record your songs and put them on the Archive.org. Link to them. Go to Irate, gnomoradio and tell them about you. Forget you album release and just put it all online. Then come back here when we can hear your songs.--Alexandre Van de Sande 13:59, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Vanity K1Bond007 16:11, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
  • keep and i tought wikipedia was a free encyclopedia // creative commons??? // we have such a small market here // selling 5000 albums is almost a myth in quebec // anyway i see you are just elitists and want to stay between you, so...fu --67.68.229.20 05:56, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)tba
  • keep this band is starting to get recognition no google hit but that's normal, they are not a net-savy band( beside the guitar player they dont even have computeers themselves, very old school type of band in that regard but they got a blog and a message board, but their crowd is mostly street punks and poor people with non net connnection, so pretty inactive on the web keep --67.68.229.20 06:01, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment: Tba03, (i) each of us has just one vote; (ii) if you must call anybody else an elitist (or anything else), please do so on that user's talk page rather than here. -- Hoary 07:14, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
  • keep I'm working at archambault, the montreal music store and i know those guys pretty well, thy are a local talent but they are against all technology(let me tell u ) they sell cd-r's and cassettes(remember those?). i'm a disc selesperson and i sell bout 7-10 of their albums a week, mostly to punks and teens, but occasionaly to older people. they desserve a mention on wikipedia for sure, hey some way more obscure bands are there as well --207.253.250.210 16:06, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)jens
  • keep one of my coworker here told me there was a deletion request for cobaye molotov, and i think they desserve a page her especially since they dont have any other online resources(that i know of) so they will at least have one online place that talk about them, and yes they sell cd's, but just cd-r's cause they cannot afford to get prints --Archambault 16:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)julie
    • Comment: the only contributions of voter Archambault have been to this article and this vote list; the only contributions of voter Hmv montreal have been to this vote list. -- Hoary 02:21, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
  • Delete until they've actually 'emerged'. Niteowlneils 22:03, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, still not notable enough for inclusion. Megan1967 00:48, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, no tangible evidence of shows or significant recording activity, and the naming of musical influences is usually a sign of vanity. Also, something about the anon posts here makes me think of sockpuppets. Wyss 01:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nonnotable and the sockpuppets are just icing on the cake. Indrian 07:25, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Cleduc 09:08, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • keep one of montreal great garage rock band, they desserve it since they don't have any other place. and to all the deleters, if you were in montreal you wil know them, its normal that they are unknown in japan or usa, they sing in french! --Hmv montreal 18:39, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)alice, hmv montreal
    • Comment: the only contributions of voter Archambault have been to this article and this vote list; the only contributions of voter Hmv montreal have been to this vote list. -- Hoary 02:21, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
  • Delete until article establishes notability. Tuf-Kat 01:38, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete --fvw* 06:49, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
  • Delete Group doesn't seem notable. Also, Tba03, 67.68.229.20, 207.253.250.210, Archambault, and Hmv montreal all seem to have mis-signed in the same fashion. -- ckape (talk) 09:23, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. How can anyone judge a band (or their music) to be "not worth writing about" on behalf of the Internet community? Even a garage band merits a factual article in the encyklopedia. Speak for yourselves, and don't read about the band if you don't like them, but don't pretend that you have the right to decide which bands are "worthy" and which aren't! --Verdlanco (talk) 10:53, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • (responses to this: see the discussion page)
      • Verdlanco, please stop personal criticisms of people who choose to vote "delete" on this issue. You are attempting to pervert and interfere with the voting process.
  • Delete. Only when the three of them manage to come out of the garage will they be notable. Uncle G 15:47, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non notable, and the sock-puppets only add weight to this vote. --Deathphoenix 16:07, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete.Carrp 04:31, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete the article, but upload some music to archive.org and send me a link to it. I'll listen to it. It's not that we are elitists, we just don't want all those crappy unknown bands you are competing against to have articles. Pedant

[edit] Tally

Thru 07:35, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)

  • Keep (presumably qualified voters)
    1. Verdlanco (talk) 10:53, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep (new registered users)
    1. tb 08:10, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)tba03
    2. Archambault 16:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)julie
    3. Hmv montreal 18:39, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)alice, hmv montreal
  • Keep (anon/IP)
    1. 67.68.229.20 05:56, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)tba (claims to be "tba", who already voted) [multi-voting attempt]
    2. 67.68.229.20 06:01, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) (same IP as prev entry) [multi-voting attempt]
    3. 207.253.250.210 16:06, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)jens