Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Against All Authority

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, nominator's concerns have been addressed and the consensus is unanimous. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 23:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Against All Authority[edit]

Not notable, unreferenced Mdbrownmsw 17:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My !vote will depend on one thing: is Hopeless Records notable as well? If yes, then I'll cast a keep. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The answer to your question seems to be "yes". Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 22:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Added a couple of references, including an All Music Guide entry. They've done multiple tours on both sides of the Atlantic, and released split records with Anti-Flag and Common Rider. Oldelpaso 20:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Oldelpaso. Hopeless Records is a fairly known label. Punkmorten 21:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because AAA kicks ass and Hopeless Records is pretty well known. Vozzon 22:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above users, article is well sourced and act is on a notable label. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 22:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per my note above and per the discussion. If the label is known and they have multiple records, it's good enough. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 22:59, 11 June 2007 (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.