Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deaden (1991 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. postdlf (talk) 04:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deaden (1991 band)[edit]

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

nonnotable artist fails WP:GNG and WP:BAND. No sources could be found to prove otherwise. Curb Chain (talk) 06:14, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 06:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 06:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 06:19, 14 June 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, czar · · 05:15, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no indication or evidence of notability. CD/tape sales figures are unimpressive. PK T(alk) 13:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Non-notable band. They only played in clubs, there is no coverage, and their sales figures are not that good. SL93 (talk) 22:34, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - when bands have only played in clubs, they are not notable. No coverage, poor sales figures per SL93. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 19:04, 22 June 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.