Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vargotah

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. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:02, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vargotah[edit]

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

non notable band, no google news hits, all google hits are either self published, or routine/database coverage. Gaijin42 (talk) 14:16, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, your points are not valid to call a band like Vargotah "non notable". I suggest you re-google (and check more than the first 10 enties) and re-check your argumentation. I don't think that Allmusic.com releases pure "database information" but nothing than physical product releases. This is ridiculous. Check the release rooster like CDs, singles and remixes. This band has regular releases, intensive touring schedule and huge fan-base. Please stick to facts. I kindly invite you to differ between editing and vandalism in future, so please remove the deletion notice from the Vargotah articles. Thank you. Prowikia (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2011 (CET)

Allmusic counts as WP:ROUTINE database coverage, everyone who has the record published will show up there. WP:Notability is established through sources that exhibit Reliability, and in my google searches I did not find any, and I went to the Vargoth website, and did not find any links to media reviews etc. If such sources exist, then add them to the article, and the deletion can easily go away. I don't know where the vandalism topic is coming from, nobody said it was a vandal article. Gaijin42 (talk) 14:48, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:49, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:50, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for lack of coverage in Reliable sources that show the subject to be Notable. If the band had any media coverage whatsoever, I'm not finding it. As Gaijin noted, above, if anyone has such sources please add them to the article or post them here. That's going to be the simplest way to prevent this article from being deleted. Failing that, Usual Caveats apply; one album that generates a lot of coverage might be enough to show notability, and then an article would be appropriate. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all the sources seem to be linked to the band. The band website suggests that all their music is either "coming soon" or "out of stock". Even the home of the non-notable, youtube has one video which lasts er... 0:00. Suspect hoax. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 00:32, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No coverage of this band from independent sources, no awards, and none of their music has ranked. Any one of these things would support the band's notability, but all that is there is information from the band's own sources and some original research about how fans associate them with the occult. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 03:53, 11 November 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.