Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luxxury

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. east.718 at 17:04, January 13, 2008

[edit] Luxxury

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

Article was tagged for speedy by another editor. Speedy contested. I am passing on to AfD for discussion. --VS ^talk 05:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete fails WP:MUSIC, no assertion of notability. Mr Senseless (talk) 05:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Weak Delete. Slight assertion of notability (one good magazine review, soundtrack to a commercial), but it's probably not enough to get them within WP:BAND. Maybe in a year or two? Tevildo (talk) 11:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete I tagged for speedy, but this is borderline enough that I agree that AFD is the better way to go. Doesn't seem to pass wp:band and yes, maybe in a year or two it will, as Tevildo points out. Pharmboy (talk) 14:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep suggested - I added 3 more links to verifiable/notable aspects to the article: a full page article in Billboard magazine, a link to an article in BigStereo, and a link to RCRDLBL. WP:BAND states "It is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria" (emphasis mine), and there are in fact several WP:BAND criteria met now: significant independent press, International touring, known indie labels, multiple links to other WP subjects etc. Butterscotch79 (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

comment I just removed several links on the article. Myspace and blogs are not reliable sources under wp:rs, and two of the links were from the band's own website, so I removed one of those. Pharmboy (talk) 20:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

comment One of the links you removed was a clip of the Billboard piece, which I'd provided as evidence of the "Notable" contention (Billboard.com site requires a paid subscription and the article cannot be linked to directly). I've left it out of the article but believe it should still be considered verifiable support. Also RCRD LBL is, in fact, a record label which is an offshoot of Downtown Records) (Gnarls Barkley's label), so I think that link should be allowed. Its a new kind of blog/label hybrid, to be sure, but they pay artists an advance, own the masters etc like any other label.Butterscotch79 (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

comment Also, I just found yet another article about Luxxury from a national magazine, XLR8R, but it too is a clip on the band's Myspace, and is not directly linkable on the magazine's independent site. I won't link to it as clearly it won't pass muster under wp:rs, however I would submit that its yet another bit of proof of the overall Notability criteria being met. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Butterscotch79 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Pharmboy - I understood from your talk page that you prefer for discussion to take place here (hopefully I've understood you correctly, apologies if I have not!): Thanks for your comments, I was wondering if you had any more suggestions about what concretely you feel is lacking. Again, I feel as though the entry more than meets the requirements of the Notability criteria, so any specific thoughts you have that I can address tangibly would be appreciated! Butterscotch79 (talk) 01:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the first problem I saw was all the releases for 2008, when 2008 hadn't even started yet. That is always a red flag. Second, all it needs is some citation showing they have an album released on some label that everyone has heard of, and some wp:rs article where someone that isn't affiliated with the band is talking about them. Not a blog, but a real cite. That is my sole criteria, as I interpret wp:band, which is a pretty lax reading of the policy. Pharmboy (talk) 16:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

• Note to closing Admin (when that time arrives) - please see Talk:Luxxury where Butterscotch79 has listed a number of points s/he says shows the article has passed "Notability Criteria for Musicians and Ensembles". --VS ^talk 02:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:MUSIC. While the Billboard article is a great start, the criterion is "subject of multiple non-trivial published works". If and when the group meets notability (which does seem likely to happen), the article can be re-created. Precious Roy (talk) 22:06, 9 January 2008 (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.