Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Checkers

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. John254 15:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Checkers

The Checkers (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Yes, yes, I know they have a "notable label", but look at the article itself. There is nothing there. There are no good external links at all. Plus, I think it might be just on my computer, but the names of the music this band has come out with comes up as ːː on my screen. Metal Head (talk) 17:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep The group was massively popular in Japan in the 1980s. They're even mentioned in books on the subject [1]. Needs expansion of biography; maybe a translation request should be put in from the Japanese article (the Portuguese article is still stubby). Chubbles (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete No sources good enough to substantiate. Google books do not count as notable. This band, if it was as notable as Chubbles said, would have at least one decent link. It doesn't. Delete this band.Metal Head (talk) 14:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. Google books != self published book. The link by Chubbles is to a scan of a printed book. The book has an ISBN (0765605619), so unless you have a good reason to the contrary that is enough to satisfy it being a reliable source. Mdmkolbe (talk)

• Delete Once again. One book is nothing special. There are no other links, no AMG links, no music website links. Nothing. Delete the band. Metal Head (talk) 15:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment Search for them under the Japanese spelling: [2] That's 12 million hits. Maybe we should ask WP:JAPAN to help us find a decent source in the language. Chubbles (talk) 15:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete This article is not in English. If anything, just move it to the japanese section of wikipedia. There is no use putting it on the English version with no translation.Metal Head (talk) 18:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

  Comment to closing admin: Metal Head has now !voted three times in addition to his having nominated. Chubbles (talk) 18:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment to closing admin: Yes, I have voted three times, but then again, the only opponent to me has been Chubbles. I only hope that the closing admin can see that this band is nothing special and that the miniscule sources do not give enough to it. Metal Head (talk) 03:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment It appears that there is a Japanese language article for this band. Based on this and the ghits the topic is clearly notable. The English article does need significant work, but I don't think just throwing it away and relying on the Japanese language article is reasonable. For an English-only speaker there is a big difference between an all Japanese text and English text with Japanese song titles. Mdmkolbe (talk) 06:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per everything everybody other than Metal Head has said. I confess as to being all together mystified by Metal Head's position. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 10:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as per everyone but nominator. Souces have been shown. Edward321 (talk) 00:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
• keep this one please since there are sources shown now about it yuckfoo (talk) 01:31, 23 November 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.