Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Automatic Baby (2nd nomination)

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. Please note that it is always helpful when renominating a previously nominated article to explain what new issues should be considered that weren't previously. No prejudice against merging; discussion of that should occur at article talk page. Chick Bowen 22:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic Baby[edit]

One concert. This was not a band, but a one time collaboration! Not notable. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 12:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Tenacious D Fan (talk) 12:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per the previous AFD, this article met WP:MUSIC guideline 6: "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable". Since the four members were members of two bands each notable on their own, and all four members of this band are notable in their own right, a collaboration, even a small one like this, would have notability per that guideline. Umbralcorax (talk) 14:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a one time gathering is not an indication of being a band. This group has not released any material other than the recordings of the one time gathering. Note 6 on the WP:MUSIC guidelines says that a redirect may be more appropriate and that we should use common sense in applying it. Common sense says a few people that played in a concert and never again were probably not a band. AlbinoFerret (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to One (U2 song). "...it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects" This is clearly a side project for all involved. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 18:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep on the grounds that it passed AFD with a keep decision less than two months ago. Articles must not be repeatedly nominated in such a short period of time once they've survived an AFD challenge. 23skidoo (talk) 01:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Yes, it was nominated recently. However, the prior discussion did not examine any possibility that "...it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects", a reason that was "not adequately addressed in the previous deletion discussion". - Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment. Merging does not require an AfD nomination. — Gwalla | Talk 18:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Comment - No, it doesn't necessarily require it, but it will get the job done if we decide that's what should happen. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 18:24, 30 July 2008 (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.