Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D'Molls

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 keep‎. It's appreciated, StonyBrook that you moved sources mentioned in the discussion to the article being discussed. That doesn't always happen. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:10, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

D'Molls

[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)

NN band, fails WP:BAND. UtherSRG (talk) 11:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, United States of America, and Illinois. UtherSRG (talk) 11:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unless we can locate sources in paper files, this is all I see [1] for RS. Not seeing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 13:16, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:ORGCRIT. Per WP:HEY, the previous state of lackluster sourcing has been improved since I and others have added an array of independent reliable sources which back up much of what was in the article already, and added info that wasn't there. [2] The sources point to the fact that this band seems to have had a strong impact on people back in the later glam-rock era, even being noticed outside the US. [3] While it seems that their albums never charted, this is not the only yardstick for inclusion in WP:BAND (see #1). This is certainly not a case of a garage band seeking publicity—they were signed to a major record label in the 80s. Something has to be said for their song receiving heavy MTV play. A number of personnel were involved in various other successful bands of the era, some of which are linked, implying that their output here was also of a similar calibur. [4] Other activities of the bandmates were noted by these sources, such as a few books written by the drummer that were reviewed. [5] Best, StonyBrook _babble 20:37, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the signing with Atlantic seems to be the critical factor here. WP:BAND#5 requires two albums. BUT the article is loose about the timing of the record contract vs the release of their first album. If the article clearly said (with sources) there are two releases on Atlantic, I'd vote keep.
- Allmusic says Warped was on Atlantic
- Allmusic says D'Molls was on Rock Candy Records which isn't a major label
- the article suggests the Rock Candy release is a re-release.
- evidence of release on Atlantic here but that's very WP:OR.
Oblivy (talk) 01:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found the following: The band, which moved to Los Angeles a few years ago, released "Warped", its second album for Atlantic Records, over the summer."[6] "Second" implies there was a first, which could only mean their debut album D'Molls was also on the same label, so I added this fact to the article. StonyBrook _babble 11:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That works for me. I think the article could actually be a bit more definitive on D'Molls being their first album (the "Careers and Luck" Tribune article is confusingly worded, but the second cite supports this). Note that there's a non-paywall version at[7]. Oblivy (talk) 12:44, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that reference Oblivy. Switched now. StonyBrook _babble 15:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:BAND#5 and comments above.Oblivy (talk) 12:45, 20 June 2023 (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.