Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kubikmaggi

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:53, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kubikmaggi

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

Fails to meet notability guidelines. It has been deleted under WP:A7, in past but was never discussed, hence let's create a consensus first.

This way we might tag it under WP:G4 in future. Feel free to delete it under A7 though. Mr T ^(Talk?) ^{(New thread?)} 08:45, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No evidence found that any of the criteria set out at WP:NMUSIC are met. --Michig (talk) 15:23, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — sparklism ^hey! 09:04, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found this write-up, but nothing else. Unless anything more turns up, this fails WP:MUSICBIO. — sparklism ^hey! 09:41, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And?.. Now this music is not popular because it is very complicated for more people. But It group are playing unique music. Nobody does the music like it. And I think Wiki must have article about it - №7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatveySobolev (talk • contribs) 18:42, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No reliable sources cited in the article, and none found during a search. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you tell me please what's the matter concretely? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatveySobolev (talk • contribs) 23:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 01:40, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per all above.--Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 01:36, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with above comments. 1292simon (talk) 02:03, 15 December 2012 (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.