Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy & The Harlequins

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 delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:57, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy & The Harlequins

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

Entirely primary sourced article, with some advertorial undertones, about a band with no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. The only thing here is that they've released one album on a notable record label, where NMUSIC requires two albums on notable record labels before the existence of the albums becomes notability in and of itself -- and the charting claims are tied to WP:BADCHARTS like CMJ and FMQB, where NMUSIC requires IFPI-certified charts on the order of Billboard. And exactly zero of the three sources here aid in getting them over WP:GNG, either: their own self-published website, their own record label, a Spotify stream. This is possibly just WP:TOOSOON, so no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when their notability and sourceability improve -- but nothing here is enough yet. Bearcat (talk) 07:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York -related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 09:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 09:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 02:18, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The nominator's description of the refs is accurate. The search tools produce no dedcated articles or major segments from reliable sources. Does not qualifty as WP:NM. Tapered (talk) 02:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, refs don't support notability, nothing much on google, no prejudice against recreation with refs that get it passed gng or nmusic. Szzuk (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2018 (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.