Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Violet Stones (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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Violet Stones (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)

Subject has yet to meet WP:NMUSIC to merit a page in Wikipedia mainspace. WP:TOOSOON Cassiopeia^(talk) 03:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Cassiopeia^(talk) 03:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Cassiopeia^(talk) 03:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This one is a close call, but I must agree that it is too soon for this band. They have gotten some early and brief mentions in the Australian alt-rock press ([1], [2]), but I don't think this achieves the "significant coverage" requirements at WP:NBAND. Their notability may improve if their recent debut album get any notice beyond the specialty press. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 00:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doomsdayer520’s comment is thoughtful and compelling. Woerich (talk) 02:13, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The sources Doomsdayer linked are fairly short, but IMO they meet NMUSIC's standard of being "non-trivial." I'm not quite so sure that they're reliable, though—they're fairly obscure sources, but they do seem to be well-run operations with full-time people behind them. Also, if this is kept, it should be moved to The Violet Stones (there's nothing to disambiguate it from). Gaelan 💬✏️ 20:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - This is, as stated above, somewhat of a close call. The group has received a bit of attention. That's important, to an extent, but then we still don't have enough coverage to really build a page. I'm not sure, but deletion seems to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:34, 15 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.