- 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 no consensus. Barkeep49 ( talk) 17:07, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Weird SoundCloud
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Weird SoundCloud ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable enough to have an article on WP. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NEVENT. Störm (talk) 17:07, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 17:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. There are already references to significant coverage in the article, including in-depth articles from Vice and The Daily Dot. The nominator also cites Wikipedia:Notability (events), but this isn't an event. the wub "?!" 18:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Vice, The Daily Dot are not quality sources, especially last one. Also, to be notable, the phenomenon should be discussed in multiple
WP:RS, see
WP:SIGCOV.
Störm
(talk)
12:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- According to
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources "The Daily Dot is considered generally reliable for Internet culture"
the wub
"?!"
20:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- The wub, See in the list for Vice: There is no consensus on the reliability of Vice Media publications. We need at least two quality sources to pass WP:GNG, currently it is one. Also, I am open for a redirect to Sound Cloud, or selective merge. Thanks. Störm (talk) 09:49, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- According to
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources "The Daily Dot is considered generally reliable for Internet culture"
the wub
"?!"
20:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Vice, The Daily Dot are not quality sources, especially last one. Also, to be notable, the phenomenon should be discussed in multiple
WP:RS, see
WP:SIGCOV.
Störm
(talk)
12:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 05:37, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 05:37, 13 December 2019 (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 no consensus. Barkeep49 ( talk) 17:07, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Weird SoundCloud
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Weird SoundCloud ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable enough to have an article on WP. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NEVENT. Störm (talk) 17:07, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 17:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. There are already references to significant coverage in the article, including in-depth articles from Vice and The Daily Dot. The nominator also cites Wikipedia:Notability (events), but this isn't an event. the wub "?!" 18:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Vice, The Daily Dot are not quality sources, especially last one. Also, to be notable, the phenomenon should be discussed in multiple
WP:RS, see
WP:SIGCOV.
Störm
(talk)
12:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- According to
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources "The Daily Dot is considered generally reliable for Internet culture"
the wub
"?!"
20:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- The wub, See in the list for Vice: There is no consensus on the reliability of Vice Media publications. We need at least two quality sources to pass WP:GNG, currently it is one. Also, I am open for a redirect to Sound Cloud, or selective merge. Thanks. Störm (talk) 09:49, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- According to
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources "The Daily Dot is considered generally reliable for Internet culture"
the wub
"?!"
20:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Vice, The Daily Dot are not quality sources, especially last one. Also, to be notable, the phenomenon should be discussed in multiple
WP:RS, see
WP:SIGCOV.
Störm
(talk)
12:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 05:37, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 05:37, 13 December 2019 (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.