Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Happy Cactus (band)

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. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 05:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Cactus (band)

Happy Cactus (band) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Not notable, only one article links here, very little editing activity Croctotheface 18:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• After applying some rather extensive google-fu (lots of false positives), I vote weak keep. The band might satisfy WP:N, primarily because of its connection to Colin Meloy but the article itself is barely even a stub. -- Seed 2.0 19:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep also. Notability per connection to Colin Meloy. Mentioned in a sufficient number of places. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 20:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• I just want to mention that the article has no references, which I left out of my nomination. Also, per WP:NMG, Meloy's involvement makes it likely that the band has been "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works" (which is the main notability criterion), but it is often best to merge and redirect pages on bands that are only likely to be notable for this reason to the page about the person in question, in this case Colin Meloy. Considering the small amount of information at the page, I don't think we'd even lose anythng by doing that. Croctotheface 20:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep... or merge/redirect. I'm a bit indifferent about this, but Colin Meloy's involvement appears to fulfill criteria #5 of WP:MUSIC. However, I wouldn't be opposed to a redirect per criteria #5's qualifications. That said, I would think that since Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia and there exist at least *some* references and citations, that we should keep this article. Rockstar915 01:25, 6 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.