Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apache Stone
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 speedy keep. Withdrawn nomination with no outstanding delete !votes. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 07:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Apache Stone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:Music by a mile - unsigned band. Might be worth a line in Mike Lombardi but that's about it. --Cameron Scott (talk) 15:31, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- keep Well I'm convinced by what's been presented. --Cameron Scott (talk) 10:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per coverage in Worchester Magazine and an album review in the New Haven Advocate and the Stuttgart Daily Leader (the latter sources added following nomination). There is also this article in the Boston Herald, which I don't have access too.--kelapstick (talk) 16:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The review of a unsigned band's self-released album isn't enough - it fails WP:MUSIC. --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Multiple independent reviews of a band's album is actually enough to establish notability for the album itself. And there has been significant coverage of the band itself, and if a band passes the general notability guidelines there is no requirement to pass WP:MUSIC. Also there is this article about the band from Monsters and Critics.--kelapstick (talk) 18:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The review of a unsigned band's self-released album isn't enough - it fails WP:MUSIC. --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 16:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep, fails WP:MUSIC per nomination statement, but appears to meet baseline notability requirements. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- appears to meet baseline notability requirements. How? which sources do that? It's just another myspace band, the only difference is that one of the guys in it is a minor actor - so that would meet the requirements for a mention on his article - but an seperate article? naw. --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per RightCowLeftCoast and per WP:BAND criterion 1. Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable. It looks as though there are other articles that could be used as refs, other than the ones already there, as well. Probably worth someone looking at that.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The songs were featured in two episodes of a notable television show. Plus it has coverage. Dream Focus 10:21, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Snowball Keep due to the sources added after the nom its clearly noteable enough to merit an article. FeydHuxtable (talk) 18:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.