Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lullwater (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 delete. Sandstein 18:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lullwater (band)

[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)

Cross-referenced with the Wikiproject Albums source guide, the citations provided for this article are largely unreliable. The sources not actually listed as unreliable do not inspire confidence with their About Us pages or site design. There's a link to Paste Magazine, but it's to its Noise Trade section which is promotional and not independent of the subject. The provided Billboard citation does not mention the subject, or support the claim it's attached to for that matter.

All told, we're a ways away from WP:GNG and WP:NBAND has not been met. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 06:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 06:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 06:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 06:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guys....I've done my best to follow all the rules established by Wikipedia with help from several editors. My sources are from true music publications, music writers and music publications that follow current artist. I've even show two main criteria for meeting a musical band - Lullwater has had rotation on Siruis Radio Channel and had charted on Billboards Secondary Market most added rock song in the week of 10/5/19. Granted, this is not the Rolling Stones or the Foo Fighters with #1 singles and album sales on Billboards top charts, but it is an upcoming band that is making a living by touring an supporting other major artist while trying to get more popular every day. Just because they are not a major player yet in the music world, I think they should still be able to be recognized by Wikipedia as a working band trying their best to succeed. The fact that they can be found on a Wikipedia search would lend credit to their hard work - it is not considered promotional in any way as far as I'm concerned. Thanks for listening. Lullwaterfan (talk) 21:28, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The issue isn't that your attempt to write the article is promotional, but rather that there's insufficient coverage in reliable sources to comply with Wikipedia's verification policies. The standards for musical journalism are fairly low in practice: I'm willing to accept pretty much any coverage as long as its written by a professional publication with a publicized editorial masthead and bylines, and isn't blatantly promotional in its copy. I don't think that the provided sources meet this standard. If the band is up and coming as you say, WP:TOOSOON may apply. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:46, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Granted, they have not been covered by Rolling Stone magazine or MTV, but those are not the only music business publications out there. Lullwater is only "up and coming" because they haven't yet broken through to be a headlining band in today's music industry. But, they have a long (since 2007) and solid reputation as a quality opening act for such top tier musical acts as Passafire, RA, Amaranthe , Butcher Babies, Theory of a Deadman , Candlebox, Gin Blossoms, Collective Soul, Daughtry. I'm just a fan that would like to see a great band be represented on Wikipedia so others can learn about them. I've not included any promotional garbage that makes my article appear like a commercial for the band. Only facts! How can I show you all these articles and interviews about the band and bands like these that have almost zero information on them are on Wikipedia?? Examples: 2:54, InCrest, Yuck_(band), Fangclub, My_Ticket_Home. Lullwater's music can be found on iTunes, Spotify and Pandora. What more must they do to show they are an established act that has just not made it to the top tier of acts yet ???? Lullwaterfan (talk) 23:06, 16 April 2020 (UTC) [reply]

What more must they do to show they are an established act that has just not made it to the top tier of acts yet find me three full reviews of their albums or concerts in professional publications that clearly identify their writers and editors and I'll gladly withdraw this nomination. Regarding those other articles, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:14, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the following Album reviews and concert reviews and see if they meet your criteria. Once again, these are not Rolling Stone, but they are publications that cover rock music concerts and albums. I'm throwing a bunch at you, not to prove a point, only to hopefully show you something that will convince you that Lullwater is getting press while on the road. Thanks for considering these ... https://www.nationalrockreview.com/album-reviews/lullwater-by-lullwater https://crypticrock.com/lullwater-revival-album-review/ https://www.mnprmagazine.com/blacktop-mojo-otherwise-crusens-peoria-il/ https://musicinjection.com.au/2019/01/23/lullwater-refuses-to-be-still/ http://mayhemrockstarmagazine.us/lullwater-releases-visualizer-for-dark-divided/ https://www.tattoo.com/blog/lullwater-release-highly-anticipated-lp-voodoo/ https://ventsmagazine.com/2019/03/18/lullwater-release-new-music-video-for-empty-chamber/ https://digitalbeatmag.com/album-review-lullwaters-voodoo-out-february-22-2019/ https://ignitemusicmag.com/2014/04/20/lullwater-freebird-live-the-new-grunge-with-a-southern-flare/ http://momentsinsound.com/a-lasting-impression-lullwater-at-house-of-blues-in-chicago/ http://www.chicagonow.com/chicagoland-concert-event-review/2017/08/triple-play-concert-series-round-three-collective-souls/#image/7 https://indiebandguru.com/lullwater-voodoo/ https://crypticrock.com/lullwater-revival-album-review/ https://www.bleachbangs.com/lullwater-to-release-voodoo-album-on-february-22nd/

I looked at the first, third, and fourth article and they were all PR pieces, and I can tell from the purple links that you reposted several articles that I already reviewed as citations in the article (which is why I skipped #2, a source that is literally listed as unreliable at the source guide for album reviews). I'm not wasting any more of my time on this. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 00:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your nasty note to me - "don't waste my time" - and I realize I'm not going to convince you of anything. I gave it a good try. Thanks for listening. I'll take my chances with Wikipedia:Deletion_review. Lullwaterfan (talk) 01:51, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NBAND and any WP:SIGCOV that could be used to establish WP:GNG comes from PRs, primary or otherwise unreliable sources. Sulfurboy (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm inclined to agree with the nom's analysis of the sources. There are obvious PR-rehashes, and there are fan reviews in UGC publications, but I'm not finding any significant coverage in a proper independent RS. I can't see a way for this to pass either GNG or NBAND. GirthSummit _(blether) 12:55, 23 April 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.