Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Envelope (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. j⚛e decker ^talk 02:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Envelope (band)[edit]

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

Entirely unsourced article about a band whose only substantive claim of notability per WP:NMUSIC is criterion #10, the very one that contains the proviso that it supports a redirect to the notable work, not a standalone article, if it's the only substantive claim of notability in the article. In addition, a standalone bio about the lead singer was recently created by User:Envechris — note band's name, note lead singer's name, note conflict of interest rules — with exclusively primary and unreliable commercial sources, and not even the first hint of any more reliable source coverage than the exactly none that is present here. I'm certainly willing to withdraw this nomination if good sources can be added, but it can't stand on Wikipedia in this form. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 19:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm not coming up with any significant coverage in reliable sources for this act to meet WP:GNG. The song on One Tree Hill looks legit, but as noted above, WP:BAND suggests that satisfying criterion #10 alone is generally insufficient to warrant an article. Gongshow talk 20:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not only is it unsourced, this article reads like a webpage advertising the band. It fails WP:BAND except for criterion #10, but as pointed out above, that alone is not sufficient to maintain an article. Johnny338 (talk) 21:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a band to be covered in an encyclopedia. Gdfusion (talk) 23:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Nothing encyclopedic here. –Davey2010 • (talk) 00:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Not notable. Promotional article. No references. --Jersey92 (talk) 03:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:11, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:12, 24 June 2014 (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.