Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fen (band)

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. JohnCD (talk) 17:30, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fen (band)[edit]

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

non notable unsigned band WuhWuzDat 16:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm suprised - Fen are getting great reviews in the UK metal music press (both Terrorizer and Metal Hammer magazines), and their CDs are available on the CODE666 record label (so in record stores/online stores) so I thought that this met the guidelines?

If it helps I've just added some links to their releases, and linked a couple of wikipedia pages that mentioned them. Hope this helps!

Weak keep. I reckon this is pretty borderline. I am unfamiliar with many of the websites on which reviews have been posted so I cannot be sure of their reliability, but coverage in Metal Hammer and Terrorizer, probably the two biggest metal magazines in the UK, is a good sign. I do not know how extensive this coverage is so I will not go above a weak keep. On a completely irrelevant note I had a listen to their music and they're actually pretty good! Article could do with some formatting and stylistic alterations though. Postrock1 (talk) 17:59, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep with the new links. –SJ + 18:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for reconsidering! To give you an idea of the level of coverage, Metal Hammer for March 2011 had a whole page feature (page 110) with the strapline "Expansive Brits redefine the black metal landscape". The album review of Epoch was in the February 2011 issue page 119 where it had 2/5 of the page. The April 2011 edition of Metal Hammer reviewed their split release with De Arma giving it 8/10 (page 120). Hope that helps. Willzuk (talk) 16:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have just added links to the record labels to the page as well - and added the record label Nordvis on which they have a split release Willzuk (talk) 12:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If I go through the criteria on the page WP: Band - and it says that a band may be notable if it meets one of the criteria - i've listed three in hope that this helps!
Criteria 1: (subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself). - They have been featured in Metal Hammer and Terrorizer - there have been interviews/album reviews/live reviews - some of the issue numbers are listed on the page. In the UK these are the big magazines for metal, they were covered in those magazines last year and this year have made regular appearances (at least something in most issues)! (they've probably been in other music magazines but I only read these two - there are loads of reviews online and I linked some to the page)
Criteria 4: Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country. They've played shows with other notable bands on tours and festivals that have been covered in Terrorizer. Such shows are mentioned on the page
Criteria 5: Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels. They have two albums out under Code666 - a label that if you look at the list of bands has other bands featured on Wikipedia such as Negura Bunget and Aghora & The Prophecy.

I hope that helps - the ease at which you can buy there CDs in the stores (HMV, Fopp - the big music stores in the UK) or online from almost any retailer I hope counts in their favour? Willzuk (talk) 08:05, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Info Further press coverage in the April 2011 Terrorizer magazine just out - large picture of the band (page 49) as part of the "Post Black Metal Report" - also featured large 7 paragraphs on the band, which is in part an interview with The Watcher. A Waning Solace (from Epoch) features in the "10 Essential Anthems" listed as part of the report. Terrorizer magazine is widely availble in UK newsagents and in this issue Fen are on pages 49 and 50. This shows that they are getting regular coverage in the established UK music press. Hope this helps! Willzuk (talk) 16:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment added to the page another reference for appearance (review) in Terrorizer magazine (Feb 2011) showing that they are regularly appearing in widely available published works. Willzuk (talk) 11:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 00:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Loads of reviews are now linked to in the article to prove notability here - the list is becoming about as long as the article itself, and I think they should be trimmed. Metal Hammer and Terrorizer reviews are good enough for me; recommend keeping and accordingly removing links to some of the less notable reviews. Kansan (talk) 01:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Had a glance at Terrorizer and there is indeed more coverage as indicated above by Willzuk. I therefore revise my vote from weak keep to keep, this band now safely passes our general notability guidelines. doomgaze (talk) 21:19, 6 April 2011 (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.