Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death.Becomes.Her (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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Death.Becomes.Her (Band)[edit]

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

Looks like a badly written and poorly sourced promo piece for their 2017 EPs. No evidence they ever made it into the charts. Fails WP:GNG. The Banner talk 02:07, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They were Malaysian based underground band, and of course they never make it to the international charts and such. The were only recognised by Malaysia citizens who are involved in the underground culture and by a few of Singaporean and that's all. Of course you can't find anything about them in the NYT or Google. However I will try to provide the scan copy of articles and interview with them as the new sources. - Fansuri 01:40, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 07:27, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 07:27, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:06, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The article's creator's words pretty much state why the band isn't notable: "They were Malaysian based underground band, and of course they never make it to the international charts and such. The were only recognised by Malaysia citizens who are involved in the underground culture and by a few of Singaporean and that's all. Of course you can't find anything about them in the NYT or Google." Of course using Google hits as a sole source for establishing notability is a bad idea, but my point is that coverage for the band is indeed lacking; in fact, I couldn't seem to find anything about the band online at all, most of what I could find were for completely unrelated bands with the same name. Assuming good faith, given that the band's activities began before the internet became mainstream in Asia, it's possible that offline coverage could exist; indeed, the article cites a number of magazine articles. I'm willing to change my !vote if excerpts of these sources could be found and are deemed to be reliable. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm reluctant to vote because there's so little I can see. How does an article only 11 days old have so many dead link references? I'll look again in a few days in case there's more to look at. Gab4gab (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Group seems to have no coverage by reliable sources. What can be found is about members activity in other group. Fails WP:BAND. Gab4gab (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2017 (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.