Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misery Index (band)
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. Yuser31415 06:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Misery Index (band)
Non-Notable Band/Bandcruft SERSeanCrane 21:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, band has existed for several years and released two albums, will tour Europe (see WP:MUSIC criterion 3), All Music Guide bio and review exist. I'm not really into the metal press, but it seems likely to me that non-trivial print sources exist. 96T 21:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep, notable band, has two albums already and is currently on a European tour with Origin and Necrophagist. Certainly meet WP:Band Spearhead 22:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment is this a bad-faith nomination? The same user recently also AFD'd the Evoken article, which also clearly meets WP:BAND. I suggest SERSeanCrane to stop meddling with things s/he does not understand Spearhead 22:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- The article provided zero reliable sources, hence the nomination. Note that the 'official website' is not reliable because it is not a third party source. Perhaps if editors like yourself spent more time verifying their claims rather than accusing other editors of "bad faith nominations," there'd be less meddling. SERSeanCrane 13:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Note that albums itself are also reliable sources and it is easily verifiable whether they exist. Of course reliable sources are important but lack thereof does not require deletion. In such cases it is better to use e.g. Template:Unreferenced than to claim "bandcruft" particularly when you're not familiar with the genre. Spearhead 15:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. SERSeanCrane 16:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Note that albums itself are also reliable sources and it is easily verifiable whether they exist. Of course reliable sources are important but lack thereof does not require deletion. In such cases it is better to use e.g. Template:Unreferenced than to claim "bandcruft" particularly when you're not familiar with the genre. Spearhead 15:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- The article provided zero reliable sources, hence the nomination. Note that the 'official website' is not reliable because it is not a third party source. Perhaps if editors like yourself spent more time verifying their claims rather than accusing other editors of "bad faith nominations," there'd be less meddling. SERSeanCrane 13:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - I've never previously heard of them but a couple of minutes looking round the web are enough to show that they clearly meet WP:Band. A1octopus 23:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Two albums, multiple EPs, and online coverage (see, e.g., [1]) are sufficient to establish notability per WP:BAND. -- Black Falcon 05:13, 1 March 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.
