Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crossed Out

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. Since most people qualified their views as "weak", I don't think either side had the upper hand. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:36, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Crossed Out[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable band. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:12, 18 September 2020 (UTC) Powerviolence band from Encinitas, California. Despite their "legendary" status (and they are quite awesome, might I add, along with the genre itself - despite the rather stupid name of the genre in my opinion) I couldn't find anything reliable, just the usual junk like databases, streaming service links, download sites, playlists (including the one included in the article), youtube videos and trivial mentions (they are mostly mentioned in the context of the powerviolence genre). I have found some album reviews but they are featured on sites of dubious reliability, including the ones that are already cited in the article. Just because they are mentioned among other names in the context of this genre, does not make them notable. But prove me wrong. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete per nom. Agree that they are somewhat legendary, as far as that goes, but there's no way that enough RS are going to be found in 10-12 Google pages... I'm mostly ok with the existing refs, aside from the blog, but they're not much. Caro7200 (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:CREATIVE for their contributions to a genre Wm335td (talk) 21:51, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete due to the lack of multiple in-depth reliable sources. Although they do seem to important to the genre of "powerviolence" it's not clear exactly how much because the few sources that claim it are either other bands or a person saying that someone else said they were. Which doesn't really pass WP:CREATIVE IMO. Since reputable sources still have to discuss their influence, preferably in an in-depth way, and it can't be based on a game of telephone or what other bands have said about them. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:46, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 02:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:50, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - so this was never going to provable by the conventional in-depth coverage or normal WP:BAND criteria. However, BAND#7 or potentially NMUSICOTHER#3 (a criterion I have never used) offer possibilities. But only if they can provide at least some minimal reliable coverage as @Adamant1: notes. The current sources don't do that. But with The Music Sound, maximum rock n roll newspaper, New York Hardcore (n.b. iffy about previews, keep trying) I feel they do. By all means, the coverage is light (but reliable, I feel), but that was always going to be the case for anything seeking to utilise these criteria. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:27, 12 October 2020 (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.