Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dark Forest (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 delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Forest (band)[edit]

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

Fails WP:BAND - a search doesn't find anything to match any of the criteria. I note that the 2 albums are released by firm called "Bleak Art Records", the name of the article's creator. Dougweller (talk) 06:05, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked the article's creator, advising him that he can have a new name containing the name of the company such as "johnatBleakArtRecords" and advising him/her about COI. Dougweller (talk) 07:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 00:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

::Keep I've added some reviews of the band's work that should make the article notable enough now. SimonMagus666 (talk) 03:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC) — SimonMagus666 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Sock of Paul Bedson (talk · contribs), here because of me I'd say. Dougweller (talk) 12:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Only sources available were blogs (like BLOGS, standard footers and all), all of which not RS by any means. Perhaps Loucifer and Hellbound could be barely passable if the genre was really obscure, but it isn't. If they were notable metal, they'd pass WP:BAND and either be on a notable label or have reviews from at least one notable source. As it stands they're not listed on Metacritic either. Side note: will the OP have time to defend himself before the AfD's close if he needs to change his username first? czar · · 23:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - sources pretty much sum it up that the subject fails WP:BAND, and perhaps WP:GNG as well. hmssolent\^{You rang?} _{ship's log} 04:01, 26 April 2013 (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.