Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bang Lime
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 no consensus. JD makes a sound argument that the subject passes WP:GNG but one !vote is hardly a consensus. However, instead of relisting this again I'll close it as "no consensus". If the nominator or anybody else wants to knock this around some more then let me know and I'll reopen this AFD. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Bang Lime[edit]
- Bang Lime (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can't find anything about this band (0 hits on it in Google News archives). I was trying to 'wikify' the article, but I'm concerned about copyvio, and I just cannot find reliable sources. Chzz ► 17:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I got different results from Google News Archives than you did, mine showed what looks like an article here, which from the google snippet may be significant if not long and this passing event listing. The SPIN magazine coverage in the external links is non-trivial and in-depth, this is passing but looks potentially reliable, as is this. Anyway, as I think the SPIN and Morning Call cites look reliable and in-depth, I'll give it a passing GNG. There's more from SPIN as well, it appears. The article should be stubbed and rewritten from those sources, though. --joe deckertalk to me 19:40, 14 April 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, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:44, 15 April 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.