Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/54 Seconds

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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 17:41, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

54 Seconds[edit]

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

Non-notable band, only coverage seems to be local. One of a huge number of articles created by editor using at least one other account to overwhelm wikipedia with BeeGees related fancruft. TheLongTone (talk) 23:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages, same band under another name[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Several articles found from Austin Chronicle and Austin Post, plus a bio and review from Allmusic. --Michig (talk) 07:23, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Austin Chronicle is local coverage, I think something rather more substantial is needed. There are billions of local bar bands. They are not notable.TheLongTone (talk) 09:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is a band bio at Allmusic. However, suggest redirect related articles Jez Spencer and 4-Track Mind to band article. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 15:35, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Query Does listing on one website make this failed band notable?TheLongTone (talk) 23:54, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero | My Talk 04:43, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and redirect related articles. Having a biography on Allmusic is pretty big. The fact that an artist is listed on Allmusic is often used to help establish notability, let alone having a bio, and an album with bio. There are other sources, but I think searching for them may be complicated by the name. For instance, 54 Seconds supposedly has a good presence in Boston and in England, but searching for “"54 seconds" Boston” will return mostly sports-related content from statements like "with only 54 seconds left to go in the game", etc. Similarly, and pages with blog-related content (comments section) will show up with "posted 54 seconds ago", when Google happened to crawl the page. I do however feel Jez Spencer and 4-Track Mind should redirect to 54 Seconds, which in itself offer some expansion to the article. — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are not many things that make me come over all patriotic, but the suggestion that this band have a following in the UK brings me out in hives. We are perfectly capable of producing out own rubbish. I guess I have to bow to the prevailing opinion, but I do maintain that what career this band has is entirely down to family industry connections and the probable fact that Mr Gibb Junior does not need to earn a living.TheLongTone (talk) 18:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

afds are linked prominently atop the subject page (usually, as in this case, the top search engine result for the subject). & afds are open sometimes for weeks on end (itself unfair to living subjects, in my view). Therefore afds are never an appropriate venue for negative subjective opinions. The fact that wp allows literally anyone to publish an article does not give its editors the right to trash the subject. Given the openess of the model, courtesy & respect for article subjects should be required at afd. If on reflection you wish to remove your comment, as I hope, please remove this one with it. 78.19.106.134 (talk) 02:02, 26 January 2014 (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.