Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warpigs (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. — Cirt (talk) 18:11, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warpigs (band)

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

Non-notable band. Wahwahpedal (talk) 11:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. — Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. The discography includes at least two albums on a major label, Polygram, so the band passes WP:BAND. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- Delete. What's the proof that they released two albums on Polygram? I cannot see any sources for that, so it's just a blank claim. If you're basing your keep vote on something that's not sourced, then the vote should be delete.--Huh direction (talk) 10:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I searched "Warpigs" + "Polygram" and found nothing that wasn't a WP mirror. Also found nothing when searching "Warpigs" + the album names or "Warpigs" + the band members' names. I couldn't find an official site, a MySpace, anything, just torrents and clips of their songs on YouTube. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Looking at http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warpigs there's easily enough there to make them notable. Wwwhatsup (talk) 09:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The length of a Wiki article on another Wikipedia means nothing. Don't be stupid. You know damn well articles don't fly without sources, and I see NOTHING. The Hungarian article is just as bare bones and unsourced. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If we knocked out every band that doesn't have a sourced discography I don't think there'd be many left. Hungarian sources are not easy to come by. Here's a remix on Universal. Allmusic lists several records. What I think can be taken on good faith is that the band had longevity and several albums released via major labels. Wwwhatsup (talk) 19:18, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I only see one of them being on Polygram, and have been completely unable to verify that it was released on Polygram as searching for the album name + Polygram gives me nothing but WP mirrors. English Allmusic screws up label names all the time, so I would say the Hungarian one does too. And you're still dodging the issue of sources. Why the hell can't you accept that there ARE no secondary sources? No sources, no article. WP:BAND only says that an artist may be notable if they have multiple major label albums — MAY and WILL are not the same damn word. Learn your English, okay?!? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 22:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:12, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relister's comment: After discounting the "delete" opinion that contains personal attacks, additional discussion is needed to arrive at a consensus. Sandstein 06:14, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sources not found.--Xyz or die (talk) 14:48, 29 August 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.