Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sweet Seduction

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 delete. --Coredesat 05:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sweet Seduction

Sweet Seduction (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unsigned band, near-orphan, lack of sources. kingboyk 14:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete unsigned bands are rarely notable. Just shy of a speedy deletion due to claim that they were covered in a magazine. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Inadequate notability at this time. Once signed may very be successful at which point page can be reposted but until then wikipedia is not a crystal ball. A1octopus 12:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
• Weak delete may have had just enough third-party coverage to justify a reasonable stub but I fail to see how this could, at present time, be a properly attributed article of more than 3 lines. Pascal.Tesson 19:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep It's a small article that I'm sure is not going to overfill Wikipedia's hard drive. There is no reason to delete it. --Darth Borehd 01:04, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per A1Octopus. Jerry 01:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:MUSIC. No secondary sources. —Cryptic 01:20, 7 April 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.