Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ReGenesis (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 redirect to Genesis (band)#ReGenesis since they are already mentioned at the target. Any further merging is a matter for editorial discussion. SpinningSpark 17:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ReGenesis (band)[edit]

[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)

I'm struggling to see the notability of this band. The article has two references, one of which is a gig review (no evidence it is from an authoritative source) and the other – although published in Sound on Sound (which is a RS) – was written by a member of the band. There are a few mentions of the band having worked with notable musicians, but WP:NOTINHERITED. I think this is a case of WP:EXIST, and there are a) no reasonable claims to notability, and b) no reliable third party sources to back anything up. MIDI (talk) 20:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:58, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:58, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have removed a lot of unsourced and unverifiable content, so the article looks substantially different to when I nominated it here. For the sake of transparency, this diff shows the edit. MIDI (talk) 08:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep or selective merge to Genesis (band)#Legacy in a new subsection. I did find one quality piece of RS on the band in a university library search accessed through PROQUEST: "SHOW PEOPLE: SEE THE REGENERATION GAME". The Stage. October 7, 1999. p. 10. The group is also mentioned in these, three, books by respected musicologists; but they are brief mentions which all state that they are a notable tribute band. 4meter4 (talk) 23:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. So, they're a tribute band, and the evidence we have says that they're a tribute band who have performed at some concerts, which is what tribute bands do. Or, to put it another way, they've got a job, and they do it. This isn't enough to create notability: you are not notable simply for doing your job. How about their recordings? None of them seems to meet the notability requirements for recorded music: they haven't charted, they haven't acquired notability through being featured in an important cultural artifact or event or performance, and so on. Are they a supergroup and thus notable for that? No. I think it's fairly clear that this article, though it probably does contain truths, doesn't contain any truths that are notable. RomanSpa (talk) 09:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, I disagree with your characterization of the sources. The majority of tribute bands don't get mentioned in serious musicology literature. This tribute band is acknowledged by multiple musicologists as a notable tribute band in scholarly writing. Additionally, the article in The Stage gives significant in depth independent coverage of this band, which is not something that happens often with tribute bands in print media.4meter4 (talk) 07:18, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 03:16, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am a Genesis fan, but unfortunately this band does not meet WP:BAND criteria and there is not significant citations. Boredathome101 (talk) 03:58, 21 October 2021 (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.