Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheerbleederz

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:51, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cheerbleederz[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable music act. No sourcing found in RS. Oaktree b (talk) 14:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 14:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There are four reputable sources already on the page, as many as a lot of other bands with pages on Wikipedia have that go undeleted. Seems unnecessary to nominate for deletion. Lewishhh (talk) 15:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are the sources cited up to WP:RS standards? The coverage seems non-trivial but I'm not familiar with the editorial standards of any of those sites. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 16:02, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcebot says the Clash is fine, the rest likely aren't. Oaktree b (talk) 16:59, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dork is a UK based music magazine. Louder Than War is a music and culture website. Gigwise is a music news site. All are reliable sources for music news run by journalists. Nothing cited is marketing, biased, self-published, or user-generated. Lewishhh (talk) 10:30, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - The sources already in the article show that their album has been reviewed substantially by some reliable punk/alternative publications. However, I am a bit concerned about WP:TOOSOON and WP:SIGCOV because those album reviews are low on encyclopedic and biographical info on the band itself, as if the reviewers didn't have any interest in digging deeper. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - Needs more citations, I don't think the current coverage is enough.Naomijeans (talk) 17:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Glad to see this band represented on Wikipedia, especially in light of efforts to address gender balance on WP (which WP:TOOSOON has been proven to create bias). I recalled that the band have played festival internationally and added those in. Some of these festivals and the band's record label are represented on WP so would expect this also helps demonstrate notability within these contexts. Rhagfyr (talk) 19:45, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Ideally, sources should appear on Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources#Reliable sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:22, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added two citations from Punknews.org as it's on the aforementioned list. When was the list's content last reviewed? The sites I've mentioned above could easily go on there. Lewishhh (talk) 10:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - This page needs a massive overhaul, but the band does pass WP:SIGCOV.

BoxxyBoy (talk) 22:40, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For some input on the citations that were added recently... also discounting the "weak keep" !vote made by the blocked editor above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - maybe the references such as Dork, Gigwise, Punknews, etc. are not the most reliable but still good enough in my opinion to support for inclusion. - Indefensible (talk) 17:30, 10 August 2023 (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.