- 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 07:16, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Spycatcher (band) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about a band, not
properly sourced as passing
WP:NMUSIC. Music is one of those areas where self-promoting wannabes routinely try to game our rules by falsely claiming to pass NMUSIC criteria that they don't really pass, so passing NMUSIC doesn't hinge on the claim nearly so much as it hinges on the sourcing that can or can't be shown to verify that the ciaim is true -- but while this makes claims to passing NMUSIC's radio airplay and touring criteria, it's referenced almost entirely to
primary sources, like the band's own social networking profiles and the
self-published websites of non-media companies directly affiliated with the claims, that are not support for notability at all -- the only attempt at citing media coverage just footnotes the name of a magazine that purportedly published content about the band once in a listicle, while failing to provide the date on which that listicle was purportedly published. But even if it can be recovered, it still takes more than just one blurb in one listicle to pass
WP:GNG anyway.
As I don't have particularly good access to archived British media coverage from a decade ago, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to such resources can find enough improved sourcing to salvage it -- but nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have better sourcing than this.
Bearcat (
talk)
12:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Bearcat ( talk) 12:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:17, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:11, 26 September 2023 (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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 07:16, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Spycatcher (band) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about a band, not
properly sourced as passing
WP:NMUSIC. Music is one of those areas where self-promoting wannabes routinely try to game our rules by falsely claiming to pass NMUSIC criteria that they don't really pass, so passing NMUSIC doesn't hinge on the claim nearly so much as it hinges on the sourcing that can or can't be shown to verify that the ciaim is true -- but while this makes claims to passing NMUSIC's radio airplay and touring criteria, it's referenced almost entirely to
primary sources, like the band's own social networking profiles and the
self-published websites of non-media companies directly affiliated with the claims, that are not support for notability at all -- the only attempt at citing media coverage just footnotes the name of a magazine that purportedly published content about the band once in a listicle, while failing to provide the date on which that listicle was purportedly published. But even if it can be recovered, it still takes more than just one blurb in one listicle to pass
WP:GNG anyway.
As I don't have particularly good access to archived British media coverage from a decade ago, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to such resources can find enough improved sourcing to salvage it -- but nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have better sourcing than this.
Bearcat (
talk)
12:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom. Bearcat ( talk) 12:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:17, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:11, 26 September 2023 (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.