- 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. T. Canens ( talk) 22:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
AntiProduct
- AntiProduct ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Can not find anything to establish notability. This is made more difficult by the bands genric name which it shares with other bands. All I can find is twitter (only 500 followers), last.fm (only a few thousand plays in a decade). Ridernyc ( talk) 17:42, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 02:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 02:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete They exist. That's about all I can say about them. News hit turned up nothing, even a generic Google search had only Myspace, Facebook, and lastfm. Primefac ( talk) 09:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Overall, there's no good sources to suggest improvement with the best results being here, here, here and this (thefreelibrary, says "AntiProduct are fast becoming one of the most talked about bands in the underground worldwide"). SwisterTwister talk 06:01, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Clearly non-notable. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 12:58, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - searches show nothing which meets either WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. Onel5969 TT me 14:04, 19 August 2015 (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.
- 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. T. Canens ( talk) 22:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
AntiProduct
- AntiProduct ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Can not find anything to establish notability. This is made more difficult by the bands genric name which it shares with other bands. All I can find is twitter (only 500 followers), last.fm (only a few thousand plays in a decade). Ridernyc ( talk) 17:42, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 02:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 02:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete They exist. That's about all I can say about them. News hit turned up nothing, even a generic Google search had only Myspace, Facebook, and lastfm. Primefac ( talk) 09:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Overall, there's no good sources to suggest improvement with the best results being here, here, here and this (thefreelibrary, says "AntiProduct are fast becoming one of the most talked about bands in the underground worldwide"). SwisterTwister talk 06:01, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Clearly non-notable. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 12:58, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - searches show nothing which meets either WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. Onel5969 TT me 14:04, 19 August 2015 (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.