Talk:Coat of Eyes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Deletion

• Whether or not Billy would verify this is irrelevant and pointless. This is nothing personal, but without verifiable third-party sources, this article violates Wikipedia policy. If there are none to be found, this article certainly shouldn't be in an encyclopedia. As far as notability, The Marked deserve an article because they are frequently mentioned as being important to Corgan's development. If "Coat of Eyes" was so important, as you assert, why is the band never mentioned in interviews or articles? I am reproposing deletion on the grounds that this article is not verifiable and that the subject matter is not notable enough to mandate an encyclopedic entry. -Werideatdusk33 (talk) 17:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • To be more blunt, this is wikipedia's stance, from their verifiability page, "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." -Werideatdusk33 (talk) 17:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Wikipedia's notability standards clearly state, "it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such" when a band is only notable for being an early project of a later star. In addition, Wikipedia verifiability standards require reliable, third-party sources, none of which appear to exist on this subject. An unverified myspace post by an apparent former band member is neither "reliable" nor "third-party." Please address these concerns, or I will perpetually try to delete this article, as I do not think it has merit. -Werideatdusk33 (talk) 23:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)