Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subconscious (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 del `'Míkka>t 16:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Subconscious (band)
No WP:RS, non-notable. Delete. Bstone (talk) 01:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:MUSIC. Non notable band. Undeath (talk) 01:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 03:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete, would not appear to meet WP:MUSIC. Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC).
- Deletenot notable Fattyjwoods (Push my button) 06:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- NOTE: This article was cut and pasted and taken from the main topic of Subconscious as part of a disambiguation from the word "Subconscious" hence the added "____ (band)" many years ago (over five years ago!) I am not the creator of this article. My name is in the edit history, but this goes back to January 2003, over five years ago. I am not the one who wrote the article, nor do I have an interest in it, but it would be fair to notify and ask those who may have an interest in it and this subject to review and comment on it. The nominator is requested to seek more input in the future, as he should have done here, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Noticeboard to improve the article and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music and Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal as well as notifying music lovers at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Music. And since it's about a German band, it should also have been made known to editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Germany. This is the correct way to function on Wikipedia and not to seek out random articles to delete at whim. Incidentally, there are lesser important articles wih this kind of title, such as Sub Sub Conscious (TV episode) and it would be best to seek WP:CONSENSUS with those more familiar about any subjects before running to nominate articles related to them for deletion. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. IZAK (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. IZAK (talk) 09:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - No notable features per WP:MUSIC jump from the page. Google is not very helpful and the German equivalent to this article was deleteed 2 years ago per this discussion (de). Agathoclea (talk) 11:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Regardless of how long this article has survived on Wikipedia, I see nothing at all that indicates notability per WP:MUSIC. —Hello, Control Hello, Tony 12:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete: Fails WP:MUSIC. Frankly, there's not a damn thing in WP:CONSENSUS requiring a nom to post to six different discussion boards prior to filing an AfD, a startling notion IZAK has not before now to my knowledge proposed in AfD discussions. Hundreds of editors pay attention to AfD, and if disinterested observers can't readily establish the notability and verifiability of a subject with a bit of research, then the subject doesn't need to have an article here. RGTraynor 19:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Here here. There, there!Bstone (talk) 22:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)- Bstone: It's "hear, hear" -- and I was not defending this article with my "NOTE" above, which you seem to misunderstand, I was requesting that you try to extend yourself by notifying editors at the correct locations who may have an interest in music. I know nothing about this topic and I am not voting either way. Note, that when I sometimes come across diverse but similar sounding topics that are over-crowding a page, I try to see if it should be WP:DABed, which is what happened in this case as I neither wrote nor added to nor edited this article. Hope this is clear. Thanks for taking note. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 21:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- RGTraynor: Kindly do not twist my intentions and please WP:AGF. Thanks. I was not asking anyone to post in six different places but I was pointing out that there were at least six good places to take up this issue prior to running to delete the article, and Bstone could have tried at least ONE of them before taking this sort of action. I have in the past requested of Bstone that when nominating articles relating to Jews and Judaism topics that he at least notify the ONE such right venue, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism, something he has stubbornly refused to do, see User talk:Bstone/Archives/03/2008#REQUEST x 3, again. and his responses at User talk:IZAK#Re: REQUEST x 3, again. and it is upsetting to see that he does not wish to do things that will enhance contributions on Wikipedia rather than disgruntle editors. What bugged me even more was that I don't even care about this article since I am not its creator but why try to destroy the work of others who unlike me are interested in this music-related topic without at least giving them at least a little notice at at least ONE obvious venue at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Music. Thanks for trying to see what's going on here. 21:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- IZAK, I think everyone on Wikipedia will agree when I say that your personal and professional editing issues with me are best dealt with on my talk page- not on a random article AfD. Please respect this. Bstone (talk) 22:04, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, IZAK, I don't buy it. If you had, in fact, intended to say "Here are several venues you could have tried," you should have said just that. Your "ands", "as well as" and "should also have been" are quite unambiguous; presuming you genuinely meant what you clearly stated is scarcely an AGF violation. Now, if instead of telling us that we misunderstood, you'd like to tender a "Sorry about that," and correct your language to the message you'd prefer to get across, no problem. RGTraynor 02:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hi RGTraynor: I was writing quickly, so the words may not have come out as perfectly as you may have wanted them to read. When I wrote the first NOTE it was to point out the options, if the language was not clear enough I am sorry. But again, let me stress, I don't care about the article, it means nothing to me because I do not know anything about this subject. My concerns were that to nominate articles for deletion without letting a wider group of editors know who may care about it for real should not be overlooked, hence my stress on trying to have it noted in the other forums, none of which were informed. In hindsight I may have worded it differently, but what concerns me is that Wikipedia should not lose articles to deletionism without due notice and due process, nothing more and nothing less. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 05:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. No labels, no tour → no article, per WP:MUSIC. In fact, I don't see an assertion of notability, making it eligible for a speedy, even if it was split out of subconscious. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Even the new Album is only released on a very small label. Codeispoetry (talk) 07:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- I would say Delete due to the failure of meeting the notability standard of WP:MUSIC, but I'm kind of enjoying this little squabble and wouldn't want this afd to end prematurely :-). --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:10, 4 April 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.
