Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raleigh Theodore Sakers

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. Cirt (talk) 09:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC) This page should be brought back, I know of 5 people personally who would disagree that there's no cult following. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.72.140 (talk) 03:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Raleigh Theodore Sakers

Not sure what this would fall under - WP:BAND? Being the "angry old man" on two records and there being a bootleg of his ranting don't seem of particular noteworthiness, especially since there are no sources that I can find and no fansites to establish any sort of cult following. The clothing line named after him is only available on a Wiki-blacklisted sell-your-own-designs website. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 18:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete under WP:BAND, WP:A7, WP:BIO, WP:N...the list goes on and on. Just purge it with fire already...Cheers. I'^mperator 23:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 23:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no significant coverage, non-notable. JamesBurns (talk) 02:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But there is a huge cult following! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.12.164.252 (talk) 18:38, 14 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.

I am interested in Sakers ever since i listened to sublime, but the article was deleted. I'd be much obliged if you could bring the page back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.77.36 (talk) 01:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]