Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mucc
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The result was nom withdrawn for the band, and keep the albums. Sr13 01:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mucc
Non-notable band without an allmusic entry or other reliable source, to my knowledge. Fails WP:BAND without a doubt. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 00:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Withdrawing main nomination but keeping nomination of albums. Somehow or another, I didn't notice that they were signed to Universal. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 05:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Also nominating Kuchiki no Tou, Houyoku, and Gokusai, their albums. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 00:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Not familiar with it really, but from a google search seems to be a relatively popular indie J-Rock band.--Shadowdrak 00:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Pass WP:BAND by releasing more than one album on a major label (Universal in this case), see here for example. Article does need expansion, though. EliminatorJR Talk 01:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Keep seems notable to people who like this type of music. Have lasted a decade and released several albums. I'd give it a KEEP instead of a WEAK KEEP, if the article had reliable sources. Plus the current article is a horrible mess, so I wouldn't miss it too much if it were deleted. Black Harry (T|C) 01:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per Eliminator. Just because they may not be popular in ALL of America doesn't mean they're not notable at all. Same goes for the others you put up for deletion. ~EdBoy[c] 01:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: Notable band. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per above. Has multiple albums on a major label, and therefore passes WP:BAND. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 02:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. Keep the albums too -- if the band's notable, their albums are usually considered notable too. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 10:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I cannot believe this. One person not knowing of a band does not constitute "non-notable". Do your research before you put a deletion tag on a Wikipedia article, please. This article is simply in dire need of improvement. Same goes for the articles on their albums. --Mokkshaa 01:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- To be fair, there are still no reliable sources cited about the band, and they don't even have an allmusic.com entry. I didn't notice that they were signed to Universal, but that's why I withdrew the nomination. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 17:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - Regarding the albums, they still don't meet WP:V, seeing as there are no reliable sources about them cited. Just because the musical group may meet the notability guidelines does not mean that the albums do. I propose that they be redirected to the main article. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 17:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Actually, per WP:MUSIC .. "If the musician or ensemble that made them is considered notable, then their albums have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia.". EliminatorJR Talk 17:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- But they still have to pass official policies like WP:V. Those article don't even have any sources cited. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 18:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- There are a lot of stubs that don't have sources. I thought it was policy to leave stubs like that in place unless they are not easily expandable in their current condition.--Shadowdrak 17:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- Are the articles on the albums really expandable, though? Do any reliable sources exist about them? All they serve as right now are track listings, and that's not really anything suitable for an encyclopedia. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 19:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- There are a lot of stubs that don't have sources. I thought it was policy to leave stubs like that in place unless they are not easily expandable in their current condition.--Shadowdrak 17:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- But they still have to pass official policies like WP:V. Those article don't even have any sources cited. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 18:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Actually, per WP:MUSIC .. "If the musician or ensemble that made them is considered notable, then their albums have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia.". EliminatorJR Talk 17:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- keep please should be notabel for music guidelines really yuckfoo 01:53, 4 June 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.
