Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atargatis (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 keep. Big Dom 23:14, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Atargatis (band)[edit]

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

I don't see how this band is notable. Article is unverified, and a Google search, while complicated by the multiple uses of the band's name, is pretty clear: no hits from reliable sources, really nothing but this. I'm sure similar articles in other metalzines can be found. They are on a label with a Wikipedia article, Massacre Records, but I'm sure having an article is not the same as being a notable label in the sense of WP:BAND. Drmies (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Seems to meet WP:BAND criterion #5, having released two albums on one of the more important indie labels. Massacre Records has been around a while and has several notable artists in its portfolio. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:19, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Two albums on Massacre Records may meet criterion 5, depending on interpretation of that criterion. There are a few news items around, e.g. Blabbermouth.net ([1], [2], [3]) and Music in Belgium. Not one of the most important labels, and not the best sources, but as an internationally touring band that has released two albums commercially, I would err on the side of keeping.--Michig (talk) 07:19, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Michig, Amatulic, I value both of your opinions (we've been here before!). If you can make at least some kind of case for Massacre, I would be pleased. Amatulic, if the bands they have are like this band, then the argument is circular: the artist is notable because the label is because the artist is...but the articles for neither artist nor label indicate that they of themselves should be considered notable (let alone, for Massacre, "major"). Drmies (talk) 15:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, first I'll quote WP:BAND #5: Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of whom are notable).'

No question that they have "released two or more albums"

The criteria for Massacre are:

an independent label - yes
a history of more than a few years - yes, since the 1990s or earlier
a roster of performers - yes, see the Massacre Records article for a long list
many of whom are notable - assuming that even a fraction of the blue links of artists shown in Massacre Records meet Wikipedia's threshold of notability, then yes.

Looking randomly through the links, I see a lot of poorly sourced articles, although some are for well known bands, such as Anvil (band), which has been the subject of a documentary, has 15 of its albums with their own Wikipedia articles, one of which was released by VH-1. Raven (band) and Skyclad (band) appear to be other examples of notable bands. Many bands on the roster look like they had already established themselves by releasing albums under other labels before moving to Massacre. I think Massacre meets the intent of WP:BAND criterion #5. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:19, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:59, 5 March 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, Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 03:20, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep - millions of more notable articles, this barely meets it but one could state that they barely don't meet it. Midemer (talk) 18:45, 18 March 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.