Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Way Of All Flesh (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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-16 02:29Z

The Way Of All Flesh (band)

This is a decent article, but the subject appears to fall well below the criteria listed in WP:MUSIC. Not only is there no evidence of non-trivial independent coverage, the one album they have released is self-funded and was recorded in one of the band's bedroom(!); they have contributed single tracks to some other albums of no evident notability. Guy (Help!) 12:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, my google search suggests to me keeping. A couple of specific pages: [1] [2]. Thus my quick and easy use of google is telling me that this band appears to pass without too much trouble. Plus I'm sure there are even more sources out there if I merely bothered to look deeper. Mathmo ^Talk 14:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thise are not reliable sources, as far as I can tell. Guy (Help!) 22:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as far as I can tell they are reliable sources. With perhaps the exception of a couple of ones referenced. That still leaves many reviews of them mentioned on just those two links I mentioned. Mathmo ^Talk 06:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete one album isn't enough, they have nothing new to offer, and are still an opening act. The Esprit d'Escalier article can go too. Totnesmartin 14:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Note, "only one album" or "opening act" are not reasons for deletion. There would be plenty of bands that do opening acts or have a single album that are notable. Mathmo ^Talk 06:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 20:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Quarl ^(talk) 23:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Appears they fail WP:BAND barring the introduction of reliable sources to the contrary. GassyGuy 01:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Dhartung | Talk 04:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless reliable sources (not the bands website or fan submitted review sites) are provided. Nuttah68 19:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a site where where any old fan can put up a review, and the band's site was merely an easy collection of other sources of which numerous ones of them makes this band notable. Mathmo ^Talk 12:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I started to go with "keep" with the provided Google numbers, but then I noticed in the "Points of note" section that there is another band with the same name, so it's hard telling how many hits go to which band without some major research. I did, however, do another search using "death metal" with the band name, but I still couldn't tell. I believe the burden is on the author to come back and provide more reliable sources. Only one self-funded CD recorded in "Steve's bedroom", everything else are trivial demo cuts. I can't even say that I see any assertion of notability to prove. Cricket02 20:09, 13 February 2007 (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.