Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cooler Kids

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Nomination withdrawn. IrishGuy talk 01:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cooler Kids

Cooler Kids (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable band PageantUpdater User Talk Review me! 23:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep per WP:MUSIC, the band received nontrivial coverage in multiple reliable independent sources (e.g., Rolling Stone[1], Honolulu Star-Bulletin [2], Washington Blade[3]). --Muchness 01:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Muchness; searching turns up more coverage. EALacey 12:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Delete (changed 16:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)) - None of those references are in the article, which certainly fails WP:MUSIC without them ... also, after Sisely Treasure was deleted by CSD, it was recreated as Sisely treasure ... someone should either clean it up or {{prod}} it as NN. —68.239.79.97 (talk · contribs) 23:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. I've added relevant information from the references to the article, with citations. EALacey 18:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WjBscribe 23:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep WP:MUSIC and the band is notable. Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť(Talk) 01:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Sufficient notability to meet WP:MUSIC Darkspots 02:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per above, though the article is written like they're a no-name band. Virtual Cowboy 12:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Per above: notable, intellectual independence of sources, involvement of/with already est. notables (Lucious Jackson, Erasure)--thank you to the editor who better-sourced the material. Having said that--this could probably use a little more fleshing out and style tweaking. Long way from FA, but a good start. Wysdom 16:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per above, certainly notable. -Phoenix 00:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment no need keeping this up, I apologize for not doing more checking before I nominated this. Any admin is welcome to close this as keep. PageantUpdater User Talk Review me! 01:11, 29 April 2007 (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.