Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Martini and the Bone Palace Orchestra

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. Listed for 21 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Martini and the Bone Palace Orchestra[edit]

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

fails WP:MUSICIAN . no real coverage except event listings [1]. LibStar (talk) 04:46, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Hobart Mercury, 5 February 2009, "Music misfit brings monkey business"; The Guardian, 4 September 2008, "Review: Pop: Martin Martini and the Bone Palace Orchestra Soho Theatre, London 3/5" by Brian Logan; The Evening Standard, 3 September 2008, "WIZARDS FROM OZ COMEDY; COMEDY BY BRUCE DESSAU; MARTIN MARTINI AND THE BONE PALACE ORCHESTRA; SOHO THEATRE"; Hobart Mercury, 7 August 2008, "Martini monkey business" by Meryl Naidoo; Sunday Age, 17 February 2008, "Served with a twist" by John Bailey; The Age, 22 December 2006, "Martini stirs and shakes" by Fiona Scott-Norman; Herald Sun, 14 December 2006, "our favourite martin" by Shane O'Donohue; The Age, 28 January 2006, "CABERET" by Lily Bragge duffbeerforme (talk)

are any of these sources available online? how did you find them? LibStar (talk) 02:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Age ones are [2] [3] [4]. I found stuff with Factiva. duffbeerforme (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems to have sufficient mentions in media other than just Google News. --Canley (talk) 04:34, 10 June 2010 (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.