Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ceremony (punk 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. no arguments for deletion MINUS the nom JForget 00:39, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ceremony (punk band)[edit]

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

Fails WP:BAND as no significant reliable sources can be found for this band. Notability is not established as only unsourced trivial claims are made in the article. And while an eventual editor may try to claim it meets one of the criteria for WP:BAND, the first criteria ([the article has been ] "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable") is not met and should be used to judge this debate. --moreno oso (talk) 03:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The band has received sufficient significant coverage in reliable sources: [1], [2], [3], [4], and plenty more in less-convincing/familiar sources: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. And we'll use all the criteria of WP:BAND, thanks.--Michig (talk) 06:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also Billboard - #18 in 'Top Internet' albums chart, #49 in 'Top Heatseekers', Sputnik Music staff review, Allmusic review, Exclaim! article.--Michig (talk) 06:54, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 19:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I'm with Michig on this one. The sources aren't too hard to find with some targeted searching. The only problem with this article is that its creators used cheesy sources when much better sources are easily available. That's a reason for article improvement, not deletion. --DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 16:05, 12 July 2010 (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.