Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/P*U*S

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 of the debate was keep. I found [[User:BD2412]'s withdrawal of his nomination particularly persuasive, also User:wikipediatrix's excellent rewrite. Wikipediatrix's "WP:MUSIC is not a valid reason for deletion" argument, however, got tossed out the window in short order ... I do hope she doesn't mind. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 11:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] P*U*S

Delete. NN band vanity; fails WP:MUSIC. BD2412 T 03:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

• Vote changed to keep, based on evidence of album releases, touring, presence in a significant compilation album. BD2412 T 20:01, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Keep. By WP:MUSIC's criteria, many well-known punk rock bands would not rate inclusion in Wikipedia. I think P*U*S is certainly just as notable as Amebix, The Screamers, The Bags, AFI, Strapping Young Lad, Limp Wrist, The Quick, The Locust, Pig Destroyer, Exhumed, Big Boys, The Gerogerigegege, Antioch Arrow, Crumbsuckers, Nasum, Discordance Axis, Kommunity FK, Venus and the Razorblades, Los Crudos, The County Medical Examiners, Bleeding Through, Disclose, Earth Crisis, Melt-Banana, Agathocles, Dezerter, Missbrukarna, GG Allin, Robokyke, Scissor Shock, Basket of Death, Dashboard Confessional, Impetigo, Super Heroines, The Dillinger Escape Plan, Anal Cunt, Jet Jaguar KR-3 Kill Spree, Gronibard, Narcosis, Youth Brigade, Deep Turtle, Impaled Northern Moonforest, Assück, Breakdancing Ronald Reagan, Destined to Fester, Bayi, Kindergarten Hazing Ritual, The Jabbers, Amoebic Dysentery, Mukilteo Fairies, Anti-Cimex, Dinah Cancer, Ratos de Porão, Agoraphobic Nosebleed, Necrocannibalistic vomitorium, Vaginal Creme Davis, Hirax, Cro-Mags, Paracoccidioidomicosisproctitissarcomucosis and The Dicks. Also observe that WP:MUSIC states "Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted". wikipediatrix 04:40, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Please note that many of those bands are not punk bands. Punkmorten 09:37, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, the band only existed from 1998 to 1999 and didn't release any music. -- Kjkolb 07:39, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Didn't release any music?? Obviously you didn't read the article! wikipediatrix 14:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I was confused with the date typo having them only existing for a year and I thought that the albums were self-released or demos or albums by other bands the members were in as the old version of the article only talks about demos and jam tapes existing. A band only has to release two albums to meet WP:MUSIC, so I'm surprised you didn't give that as a reason to keep. -- Kjkolb 08:33, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Corrected typo. Band existed from 1988 to 1999. Darren Bowles

Was any of their music released by an official label instead of being self-produced? - Mgm|^(talk) 15:18, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, we had two main record labels, Know Records and Bomb Factory Records. User:Darren.bowles

I'm inclined to change my vote if further evidence is provided to support the various claims of notability (e.g. airtime, touring history). I'm curious about the "Anti Fascist Benefit LP" - was that a band LP, or a compilation? The references I've found online refer to an Anti Fascist Benefit event, rather than an album - is the album related to the event? BD2412 T 23:50, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

The title of the LP was Smash Fascism, on Gnome / Grinding Madness Records in Belgium. It was a compilation LP. User:Darren.bowles 86.140.240.119

• Delete, nn band vanity, fails WP:MUSIC. If wikipediatrix truly believes those bands are not notable, nothing is stopping her from AfDing them, except for WP:POINT. User:Zoe|^(talk) 07:44, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Um...I'm saying these bands ARE notable! wikipediatrix

• Delete as vanity. To be sure, it was created by User:Darren.bowles, whom this article identifies as the band's vocalist via a articlespace-to-userspace redirect, which should be speedy deleted as such. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 08:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
  • For the record, I speedy userfied User:Darren.bowles, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darren Bowles, hence the existence of the redirect link - which I believe should remain until the subject has a reasonable chance to discover that his errantly created self-promoting article written in the first person has been userfied. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:12, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Ok. Good move userfying it, BD. I didn't think to check check the history on bowles himself. Now delete the redirect, lol. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 15:50, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Now that User:Darren.bowles is here, he should have seen the page move - and indeed, the redirect can be deleted. BD2412 T 16:45, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Yes, I have seen the page move. Thanks. Sorry for my newbie mistake. : Darren.bowles 22:31, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: As for the bands listed by Wikipediatrix above, I would not condemn him for nominating any of them, yet I would vote keep on (at least) Anal Cunt and GG Allin (whom I have actually heard of outside wikipedia, despite having no interest in the relevant genres of music)... and speedy keep for Dashboard. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 08:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
    • "I've never heard of them outside Wikipedia" is not a valid reason for deletion. For the record, I *have* heard of them. wikipediatrix 14:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Trix, If you look closely, you'll see you're putting words in my mouth. I named three I would surely vote keep on, because they are so notable, even I have heard of them, which indicates a higher level of fame than simply passing WP:MUSIC, I assure you. Notice that I did not say "I plan to vote delete on all the others because I haven't heard of them"... Also notice I said to delete P*U*S simply because the lead singer wrote it, and that is a valid reason. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 15:50, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
        • My apologies for assuming an implied corollary.... however, I should point out that the lead singer didn't write the current version of the article: I rewrote it extensively to remove first-person NNPOV and so it wouldn't be a carbon copy of their own website. I have heard of P*U*S and have read about them in the magazine MAXIMUM ROCK N ROLL, which unfortunately is not an online reference. wikipediatrix 17:34, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Some of them, certainly not all, should be nominated. Among those listed, AFI is the "most notable" I reckon. Punkmorten 09:37, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
• AFI and Dashboard Confessional have both charted. While these guys were active, they don't appear to meet our music notability guide so Delete Changed my vote to keep as it appears that they meet WP:NMG by appearing on tours and releasing a number of records. Capitalistroadster 18:08, 20 November 2005 (UTC) Capitalistroadster 10:04, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I wish everyone would stop invoking WP:MUSIC like it's official policy. From the music notability guide: These are guidelines "which many editors agree with in principle. However, it is not policy." And also, I repeat: "Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted". For the most part, I think if the user's expertise does not fall within a given genre, they should probably recuse themselves from getting involved in articles on that genre. I certainly wouldn't presume to know who is notable and who is not in the world of, say, Fusion Jazz or Christian Rock. wikipediatrix 14:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
    • I've found the webpage of the bands' label, Know Records,[1], and apparently a few of the nominated bands' recordings can be bought there, [2], [3]. Still not quite enough for me to say that this is a band that belongs in an encyclopedia, tho. BD2412 T 15:12, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
      • It seems unfathomable to me that a band that has released records over the span of a decade and has been seen live by thousands of people has to be tested by such rigorous standards, especially when Wikipedia is neck-deep in articles that mean absolutely nothing to almost anyone. I know, I know, you probably think those articles should all be deleted TOO. *smile* wikipediatrix 17:34, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

• • Is it a known label or some backyard company? Verifying this as a legit label would satisfy WP:MUSIC along with their listing on Amazon. - Mgm|^(talk) 15:18, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
• I have read the WP:MUSIC. The band had toured the UK, playing with bands such as Doom_(band), OI_Polloi, Citizen Fish, Radical_Dance_Faction, The Blaggers ITA. We have released many records (see discography), of which some can still be purchased today. Thanks to the external links placed on the page. We have been played by John Peel on UK radio. We have also had airtime on several US radio stations. We were interviewed in many fanzines in many countries, from the UK, to USA, to Japan, Australia, Russia, France etc. Including Profane_Existence User:Darren.bowles
• Delete. I was sitting on the fence but I think think the above makes a good case for the vanity charge. Ifnord 16:37, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
  • It would have if Bowles' original article was there, but I've rewritten it to make it more neutral. wikipediatrix 17:34, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

• • • It's all in the choice of pronouns. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 17:09, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: Let's be extremely clear, eh? Delete P*U*S, because it isn't as good as, say, The Dicks. By being unreleased, undistributed, they fail the criteria. The rest of those articles mentioned aren't up for consideration, so let's not confuse the issue. No one wants to delete Pylon, and being thwapped with a red herring isn't going to change the subject. Geogre 20:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
  • How could you have possibly read the article and come away with the misconception that their music is "unreleased and undistributed"??! Slow down, focus, and try again. The largest section of the page is the discography. It is full of records. Real records. Vinyl records. Records on labels. Records with distribution. Records I have read reviews of in magazines. There's even pictures of them for people who don't like to read. wikipediatrix 04:05, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Non-notable. --StoatBringer 22:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. And all those others as well :-) Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 22:49, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
  • • Abstain I may be missing something here? Play on John Peel is not a sign of notability, any more than playing at King Tut's is. Both make (made) a point of giving play to unknown bands, most of which were never heard of again, but one or two went on to be massive. So, I can't say this band meets my perosnal criteria, but it's evident that some poeple whose opinion I trust think they pass WP:MUSIC. I'm not so certain, the bands they were supporitng on tour look a bit borderline to me anyway, and I can't make enough of the info on the web to sort fact from fandom, so I now abstain. - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 10:08, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Change my vote to weak delete. Reyk 01:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 10:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

• Radio playlist information. [4] User:Darren.bowles
• Keep as per the trustworthy judgement of Capitalist Roadster. —RaD Man (talk) 06:46, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and hopefully expand --Halal 14:48, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Seems sufficiently notable within the field, as near as I can tell. Some of those album covers should be pulled from the article, though, once image display is working properly again. One or two would be OK, but as things are, they overwhelm the text.-Colin Kimbrell 19:14, 22 November 2005 (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.