Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Heretics

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 06:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Young Heretics[edit]

Young Heretics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested/declined speedy. Fails WP:BAND, not WP:NOTABLE. GregJackP (talk) 23:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete — For the same reasons given by nominator. WCityMike 23:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Closer to the requirements than most bands I seem to come across, but still not enough to meet WP:BAND. --Wintonian (talk) 01:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom, though I admit after a third look that the speedy nom was probably a mistake. Jminthorne (talk) 04:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:BAND and insufficient coverage to pass WP:N -- RP459 Talk/Contributions 19:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • could be worth incubating, they may be getting there, there is a review by Chris Johnston in The Age on 28 May 2010 and this review. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The band was also featured in the newspaper 'MX' in Melbourne. This wiki is informative and a good source for fans to receive information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babyredwolf (talk • contribs) 00:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC) — Babyredwolf (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp (UTC).[reply]
    • If you mean MX (Australia), 29 April 2010, "BIG TICS FOR FREEBIE", I don't know if this two sentence article is non-trivial. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If major newspapers covered them, then the choice should be keep. If two independent significant publications exist then WP:N is passed even if WP:BAND is not. Speedy delete declined as one of the members had been in another band with an article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another short review in The Gold Coast Bulletin, 5 June 2010. duffbeerforme (talk)
  • The feature on MX was a half page cover photo. MX is has a 300,000 people a day exposure in Melbourne.
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Young_Heretics&oldid=1138711472"