Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dream City Film Club

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. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:12, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dream City Film Club[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)

Fails notability criteria of WP:MUSIC. Not the subject of serious independent, non-trivial coverage. There's little more than the standard all music biography, which most bands have. Most other results on google are a one line mention in an article. No charting singles/albums. No award nominations. Very little coverage. Album release on a niche indie label - not one of the major record labels. Fairly niche and obscure band - fails notability requirements. FirefoxLSD (talk) 00:08, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multiple albums on Beggars Banquet meets WP:MUSIC, and there is some coverage available online (for a defunct band whose work is more than 20 years old). See [1] (Allmusic), [2] (Popmatters), [3] (CMJ New Music Report). Those are three American (i.e., international) publications; no doubt searching contemporaneous Brit mag archives would uncover more. Chubbles (talk) 00:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:01, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:01, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as this staff written bio at AllMusic here as well as the reliable sources reviews identified above.Together there is enough coverage to pass WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 01:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for the reasons of those who want this article kept. Davidgoodheart (talk) 22:46, 20 July 2021 (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.