Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LION (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LION (Band)[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 WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. Internet search results turn up almost nothing. Few references. See WP:NOTYET. — Stevey7788 (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:53, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: maybe it's WP:TOOSOON, but there are definitely mentions in reliable sources, in Music Week [1] and The Independent [2], as well as a local newspaper The News [3]. Possibly not enough for an article, though. Richard3120 (talk) 01:56, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. In addition to the above, there's also [4], [5], [6], and a lot of 'LION has a new single/EP out' type articles: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. --Michig (talk) 08:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep .

~~https://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/03db14f0-7f90-48bd-96e3-e81303c91686~~

~~https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/new-pink-gwen-stefani-christina-aguilera-songs-to-appear-on-compilation-201365/~~

~~https://variety.com/2017/music/news/pink-pat-benatar-gwen-stefani-compilation-album-linda-perry-label-1202551991/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.225.65.9 (talk) 23:35, 23 March 2019 (UTC)~~ [reply]

Only one i-vote per editor. Same references are in the longer list by the same SPA editor is listed below

Delete. WP:TOO SOON. The references with the article are junk, but other editors have turned up examples of the standard new release press in RS that are indicative of a promotional push to establish this artist. Other sources in the same promotional vein are minor or non-reliable. Judging by the obvious effort to break this artist, I expect even more to turn up, but unless they differ from the “hot new artist” hyperbole promoting releases and appearances they don’t add up to much beyond press for the sake of press . I know it’s not criteria, but her social media following—-6,804 on FB, Twitter, instagram combined—is meager and just another indication that her actual notability is something less than the hype. The Rolling Stone and Variety links show her to be, under her real name, one of several contributors (comprising notables and non-notables) to a fund-raising soundtrack album, but certainly it is the presence of Pat Benatar, Gwen Stefani, et. al, rather than this subject, that accounts for this coverage. Still, having a release (although only one) on a small but decent label, plus being featured on BBC1 “introducing” is indicative of an emerging artists headed in the right direction, so consider this a "weak delete" if you like. But I don’t think she’s accomplished encyclopedic importance yet, hence the TOOSOON.ShelbyMarion (talk) 19:49, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:25, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as has significant independent reliable sources coverage as identified by Michig such as Variety, Rolling Stone and the BBC. Certainly an emerging artist but one with this coverage is notable and should be included in the Encyclopedia, social media is not a reliable indicator and the fact that likes and views have not been bought artificially shows that this is not so much of a publicity drive as is being suggested Atlantic306 (talk) 19:59, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete They obviously don’t have notability at this time. Definitely Too Soon. Trillfendi (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per shelby and trill. Nothing much to say after what they have said. —usernamekiran(talk) 12:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm not seeing any in-depth coverage, just routine mentions and directory-style listings. For example, the BBC source found by Michig isn't WP:SIGCOV, it's just a couple of routine sentences describing an artist in a playlist. Other sources noted above by various discussants are similarly not useful for establishing WP:N. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

R1 Jack Saunders (1h, 5min, 10sec) : https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0004156

6Music `Steve Lamacq Recommends’ (37min,10 sec) : https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0003zm8

https://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/770ca820-1971-4b15-9b50-096d73f725a7#more Last Played on BBC

+

https://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/03db14f0-7f90-48bd-96e3-e81303c91686

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/new-pink-gwen-stefani-christina-aguilera-songs-to-appear-on-compilation-201365/

https://variety.com/2017/music/news/pink-pat-benatar-gwen-stefani-compilation-album-linda-perry-label-1202551991/

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/features/lion-singer-beth-lowen-music-box-sessions-tour-dates-album-a8584466.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.225.65.9 (talk) 23:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:56, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now per WP:TOOSOON, move the article to a draft to be expanded and posted again at a later time, if the creator is interested. Of the sources named above, only the Independent and Lock Magazine articles are hefty enough to help prove WP:GNG. The others look negligible, in some cases only show announcements. MidwestSalamander (talk) 14:30, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete looking at the sources and other comments here, I'm persuaded by the "too soon" arguments. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:17, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete promotional and not WP:GNG Lubbad85 (☎) 12:25, 17 April 2019 (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.