Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MidnightPumpkin

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. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MidnightPumpkin[edit]

Non-notable Japanese band that seems to fail all the criteria outlined at WP:BAND. A basic Google search for "MidnightPumpkin" [1] returns no reliable, published sources that have anything to do with the band, and searches using Google News [2], Google Books [3] and Google Scholar [4] return nothing relevant whatsoever. My WP:PROD tag was removed by the creator with the rationale that "it meets one of the criteria", but no indication was given as to which criterion it meets. While the article does claim that the band's songs have been used as themes for Japanese TV shows, WP:BAND makes an exception if this is the band's only claim to notability. Unscented (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I went on the Princess Princess D article I noticed that there was mention of the band but there was no article on it, which was annoying, and then I saw there is one on the Japanese wikipedia so I just figured that since they have one, why don't we? I wouldn't say that they are non-notable (due to their two TV themes), and because of the fact that there is a lack of information in English about the band I thought it would be useful to have an article on it for those who can't read Japanese but are interested in it (because if Japanese Wikipedia has an article on it, and has done since 2006, there isn't any reason not to have one in English). Unless of course both the Japanese and English articles should be deleted for non-notability, in which case it would be fair. (The japanese article is here [midnightPumpkin]) Tom (talk) 16:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: insufficient 3rd party sources WP:BAND. JamesBurns (talk) 07:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There is a version in japanese so it is only fair that there is one in english too (or both are deleted, but the japanese one has been going since sept '06 without dispute (as far as I can see)). Razzmo (talk) 11:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 01:14, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Razzmo. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^T ^C 03:35, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete, while there are claims of notability, there is a lack of reliable sources to verify any of those claims. Fails to establish notability per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 10:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Juzhong (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What's needed is for a Japanese speaker to go to the Xtra Large Records website and confirm they list this band's albums, and that they have a sufficient number of other albums out to pass WP:MUSIC C5's definition important indie label. If this can be done, then the band passes WP:MUSIC, and this is a keeper. (I note that there's another articled band with an album out from Xtra Large Records, though their notability comes from being then signed by EMI.) —Quasirandom (talk) 17:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BAND would say "merge/redirect" not "delete" if their only claim was one theme song, but actually they seem to have done two. Searching google news archives reveals a "midnight pumpkin interview" at tv-tokyo.co.jp [5] and a short article which seems to be about them: [6] Juzhong (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--The translated version of Xtra Large Records confirm the band discography. --Jmundo (talk) 18:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So it does -- thankee. And the label does not seem to be a flash-in-the-pan company, though their catalog isn't exactly deep. That, combined with the two links Juzhong, convinces me they meet WP:MUSIC -- keep. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:07, 2 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.