Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Key Witness

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Key Witness[edit]

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

My searches found nothing at all and that's not surprisign considering it was only active for 4 years, unsigned and simply no other information. The best there is, an Exclaim! review, and that's it. SwisterTwister talk 07:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing here constitutes (or even really claims) an WP:NMUSIC pass, and there's no evidence of any reliable source coverage strong enough to get them over WP:GNG. Given the two hatnotes, however, the title should be recreated as a dab page for those two films (as well as Key Witness (book)) rather than being left redlinked — but the band definitely has to go. Bearcat (talk) 14:27, 13 May 2016 (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.