Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glory of This
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. J04n(talk page) 16:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Glory of This (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Band that was signed to a notable record label, but never charted or did anything of significance. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No citations and doesn't appear to meet WP:BAND --ThePaintedOne (talk) 16:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep. The band released two albums on Indianola Records, which may be a significant enough label to meet WP:BAND criterion 5, and there is some coverage out there - Allmusic review, inweekly.net, inweekly.net. May rest on the importance of the record label and the reliability of in as a source. One would imagine a band that released two albums on a proper label would have more coverage somewhere.--Michig (talk) 06:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- comment I looked at #5 of WP:BAND and was tempted as you suggest, but since Indianola is an indenpendent the critical phrase is (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of whom are notable).. I'm not convinced that Indianola meets that, and if it does it's a close thing. So you have a barely notable band whose notability rests soley on the barely notable status of thier label. All seems too thin to me.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 08:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The only possible reason to keep this article would be qualifying under WP:BAND point #5 as discussed above. However, I don't see that Indianola is really a significant indie label. -- Whpq (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2011 (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.