Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flood of Red

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 Delete. Doesn't meet WP:MUSIC. No problem with recreation if reliable sources are found in the future.Cúchullain t/c 22:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flood of Red

Flood of Red (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

An article on a seemingly non-notable band. Referenced by links to YouTube and MySpace, this BBC interview is the only reliable source on the band. I don't think this band passes our notability guideline. Rejected PROD. I'll add Lost in the Light to this as well, the article on their debut EP. John 18:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's an argument. The trouble is I am not finding anything about FoR on any of those three sources' websites. The lack of any apparent great depth of coverage seems to suggest mere mentions rather than the sort of serious discussion that would satisfy our standards. --John 19:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • As print magazines, I wouldn't expect to find any mentions on their websites — they generally only carry material promoting the current issue. Actually, reading the article more closely, they're only "planning" a debut album, so it would be surprising if there were substantial coverage, so I'll say delete, no problems with a new article should they merit a new round of press attention in the future. Thomjakobsen 19:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

They have toured with band such as enter shikari and the blackout to name a few. the reviews section in the article is about notability, given that the reviews are all from pretty well known magazines/reviewers.Andrew22k 19:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The trouble is that, when the article says, for example that they "appeared in an article in Kerrang magazine", does that mean a mention? An interview? The cover story? Being mentioned in passing would not satisfy our notability guidelines. Some more reliable sources indicating the band's notability are required. MySpace and YouTube do not count towards that. --John 19:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Surely the BBC ref with the reviews for the EP and the band themselfs has to count as notability. Image:Flood of red kerrang.jpg is a screenshot off of one of their pictures on myspace from the kerrang interview and even though it is not entirely practical to the article it is evidence that the band are notable.Andrew22k 19:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Having listened to the BBC interview, that is definitely a mere mention which does not meet our standard. My dad, for example, has also had a brief mention on BBC radio and a short interview on local radio. This does not make him notable for Wikipedia's purposes. The Kerrang scan (while it is undoubtedly a copyvio) is more intriguing. I would argue that as it refers to the future possibility of the band "making it", and per Thomjakobsen above, they still fail our notability standard. In the future (after a charted hit or some more comprehensive media coverage) we can revisit this. For now, I think no. --John 19:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

the bbc interview has calum - the guitarist - speaking on how the have a large fanbase on how they promoted their music using myspace and the internet? and id say the scan is a good solid piece of evidence that convey's how the band are notable and then goes on to say how they band are 'making it'.Andrew22k 19:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It calls them 'sturdy enough to "make it"', which implies they have not yet "made it". As I said I just listened to the BBC interview and it is a short interview. Neither, in my view, confers notability, quite. Others may differ of course. --John 20:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I would say it talks about how internet/myspace can help promote music and how flood of red have had this experance and note that the interview was in 2005 from which they have progressed. also this review which does talk about how they will/might 'make it' but gives some information about notability on them (the interview was before their EP was released). They also were on rockworld TV a couple of weeks ago.Andrew22k 20:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

  • They've got an AMG link, but no reviews or description. That's kind of a push, as far as notability is concerned. Nothing in Pitchfork. If the UK tour mentioned in the article could be documented as being exhaustive, that would meet C4 of WP:BAND. They were mentioned as fairly important within their (fairly minor) genre of music in this article in the Belfast Telegraph. There's also some discussion of them in this (PPV) article in the Evening Times. Bottom line: hell if I know. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 22:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
  • The AMG listing just reflects that their label have submitted it, as per this policy. Thomjakobsen 22:27, 15 October 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.