Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mellow Candle

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. Bucketsofg 20:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mellow Candle

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

The subject of the article does not meet the guidelines for notability per WP:MUSIC. They released only one album that was commercially unsuccessful. Nv8200p talk 17:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel.Bryant 10:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:BAND; all external links are to sites affiliated with the band; no evidence of coverage by independent third-party sources. Walton monarchist89 10:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep; Famous and influential prog-rock band. Has All Music Guide and LastFM entries. Songs have been covered by other famous bands. Commercial Success of Swaddling Songs at the time it was released is not a fair basis for deletion - we would not propose deletion of the article on Vincent Van Gough on the basis that his paintings didn't sell while he was alive. Google search for Mellow Candle reveals a large number of pages on the band, most of them not fan sites - and this despite the band being famous before the rise of the internet. Finally, the Wikipedia is quite often the first recourse people turn to when looking for information on (for example) a band they have just heard of. I did for this band and would have been extremely miffed had I found no artcile. A1octopus 10:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep This is a highly notable (Celtic) folk-rock band, and their reputation has grown hugely over the years. Their main album is widely considered a classic by collectors and cognoscenti types. Up there with Pentangle, Fairport et al. I have another album by them (alternate versions etc) from a couple of years back - because people are interested in them! One of the singers went on to work with Mike Oldfield, I believe. There's a resurgence in interest in this music at the moment - due to today's 'wyrd folk' movement. 'The Unbroken Circle' website (about wyrd folk music and its history) calls the album "legendary". (Maybe someone who's au fait at editing wikipedia can put a URL link in to that site; this is my first post and I don't want to inadvertently mangle the main entry) Why isn't there an entry for 'The Trees' too..., another classic ;-) Do not delete the 'long tail' - especially when it's better than most of the, er, other bit of the graph. Does this kind of silly (potential) deletion of entries happen willy-nilly across wikipedia. That's a bit concerning... 194.66.90.23 13:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Matthew
• Comment There is an entry for Trees under Trees (folk band)

I am the developer of the Unbroken Circle web site and one of the main writers on esoteric folk music. Mellow Candle are an increasingly important band whose acclaim far outsrips their sales. They pioneered a form of folk-rock that resonated with the new paganism that arose from th late 1950s onwards. Their ethereal sound has been adopted by dozens of artists. The members have gone on to solo careers and working with such as Mike Oldfield and Brian Eno. At present one member has a notable solo career and another is part of the leading avant-garde band 'Fovea Hex'. Their influence will continue to grow and removing the band from Wikipedia will limit coverage of folk music considerably.

• Keep. One of the band members (Steve Borrill) was also a member of a notable band (Spirogyra (band)), and there are some reviews of their album.[1] [2] [3] It's enough to make a decent argument that they meet WP:MUSIC.--Kubigula (talk) 04:58, 28 February 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.