Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The band Element 115

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 delete. Kurykh 03:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The band Element 115

The band Element 115 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Seemingly non-notable band, creator removed prod, suggests we deduct their notability from search engine results instead of sources. tomasz. 01:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

**Nick_Sterling

My last entry was NOT an argument to avoid deletion. As stated, I capitulate to your argument of not meeting Wiki's stated criteria. Element 115's competition must meet the same criteria, however. I couldn't help but notice that you failed to comment on the first ten entries on the list. They are listed somewhat in magnitude of failing to meet the notability criteria (in my 60 minutes of cursory research). Not only does the first entry have no original product, it is CLEARLY less notable than Element 115. The fact that said entry still has no notice of pending deletion, indicates intentional inequity of at least the wiki-editors who have been informed of the insufficiently notable entry. Why do I care? Until that entry appeared in Wikipedia, they weren't showing up on the first page of a google search. Now, they intermittently show up ahead of Element 115, which has been number 1 for almost a year. That's how I got the idea to post Element 115 on wiki. It obviously helps search engine placement. I'm just asking for fair play in a viciously competitive market. Am I being unreasonable? 68.3.167.64 (talk) 23:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)MediaMike

Comment WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:ALLORNOTHING do not make good arguments. And you still haven't answered why Richard Cheese and Lounge Against the Machine who have more than sufficient notability per WP:MUSIC are among these groups (you don't have to meet all the criterion, just most of them). Doc Strange (talk) 00:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I've edited the list to those who DEFINITELY fail the requirements. Just because one I have lined-out may also fail, doesn't diminish the argument for removal of the remaining insufficiently qualified entrants (per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:ALLORNOTHING). Are you prepared to argue for defending the inclusion of Vintage_Rock_Group? 68.3.167.64 (talk) 07:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)MediaMike

You missed The Weird Lovemakers and Killwhitneydead., both definitely notable (although you seem to have struck off Eyes Set to Kill who in my opinion are a definite deletion. Thanks for the effort, i'll probably be nominating some other bands i wasn't aware of before as well. This is still not pertinent to this debate, however: the onus on you is to prove Element 115 is notable, not that Other Band X isn't. tomasz. 09:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

You might want to read my capitulation statement two entries back. 68.3.167.64 (talk) 09:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)MediaMike

ok. tomasz. 11:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Did you even READ WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:ALLORNOTHING? The first line of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is "The nature of Wikipedia means that you cannot make a convincing argument based solely on what other articles do or do not exist". Which pretty much destroys your argument. You reasoning that your band is as notable as these other bands is pretty much useless. I'm not defending Vintage_Rock_Band (you can nominate them for deletion if you wish), but your reasoning is strange. Your band simply fails WP:MUSIC and this AfD is about your band, not Killwhitneydead., not Dryspell, not any other of these bands. Doc Strange (talk) 15:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, people, please visit the dictionary under the word "capitulate." Look, I'll save you the effort. I WITHDRAW THE REQUEST FOR INCLUSION. Please! Make my day! REMOVE THE ENTRY! I give! UNCLE! Ore kuppuku! I concede to your randomness!68.3.167.64 (talk) 08:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)MediaMike


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.