Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gil Mantera's Party Dream
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. The Nordic Goddess Kristen Worship her 22:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gil Mantera's Party Dream[edit]
- Gil Mantera's Party Dream (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article on non notable band written in very POV terms. Reads like a fan site, possible copyvio text. No Reliable Sources. Fails WP:BAND Archivey (talk) 23:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - According the the page this band has existed for 10 years and has toured in the notable van's warped tour. Their myspace page has 10000ish fans/friends which could be a good gauge of a band's notability, the question being how many fans does a band have to have to be notable or is a band only notable if they get a song onto a best seller chart? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan Orth (talk • contribs) 23:54, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Per WP:BAND they need to have reached a best-seller chart, won a significant reward, received significant coverage in the press or other reliable sources, or similar. No number of fans confers notability without something like that. Olaf Davis (talk) 00:28, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - google turned up a few newspaper reviews from their participation in the van's warped tour which seems to meet WP:BAND 4. Also this popped up http://www.spin.com/articles/gil-manteras-party-dream spin.com artist of the day of a major music review site/magazine. Someone could make a case for notability though the article itself will need to be rewritten to remove the POV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan Orth (talk • contribs) 01:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Article asserts coverage in Village Voice, Spin, which are notable/reliable sources, as well as verifiable significant touring. Needs major cleanup. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Per WP:BAND they need to have reached a best-seller chart, won a significant reward, received significant coverage in the press or other reliable sources, or similar. No number of fans confers notability without something like that. Olaf Davis (talk) 00:28, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Article is completly unsourced and is nothing more than a hobby band, which is why we have WP:BAND. Once they've achieved notabilty they can have an article, otherwise every kid with a guitar can claim notability and have an article. This is Wikipedia not Myspace. Archivey (talk) 19:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Spin link above.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - in addition to the Spin article, there are also these two interviews. [1], [2]. -- Whpq (talk) 21:33, 14 January 2009 (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.