Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nuclear Rabbit

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. John254 01:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear Rabbit[edit]

This article has been deleted by prod once, and then minor recreations speedied twice since then. It has again been recreated, in a more substantial form, and I have taken it upon myself to merge page histories with the prodded version and to bring it here to afd to get a proper airing and generate discussion, since it seems the current state of affairs cannot continue, with speedy deletion followed by recreation without a decent listing here. Hiding T 21:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:MUSIC. This doesn't seem to assert notability through reliable sources, and reads promotionally. --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 22:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nuclear Rabbit is a major underground group and very well known.Green Runner 0 22:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the article to verify that claim with reliable sources. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured in Zero Magazine, January, February, and August of 2003.[1]Mutopia reviewd in March 2004 issue.[2]Green Runner 0 22:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That isnt a reliable source. --neon white talk 02:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks reliable enough for the information it's verifying. Reliability is dependent on context, let us not forget. Hiding T 07:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but clean up significantly and add more citations. --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 23:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Cannot find anything that pass WP:MUSIC. Article is badly written and unsourced. --neon white talk 02:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for this and for this review as well. I'm not 100% convinced of the Zero Mag reference as well, but at least it's something. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 07:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve - there are 29000 google hits so I don't think there should be any problem working up a reasonable article (eg this review of Mutopia, an album - there could be a section on Mutopia). There also seems to be no great difficulty sourcing an article on Jean Baudin (created and deleted several times). Occuli (talk) 08:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

unreliable, self-published sources and blogs are of no use to asserting notability. We need reliable sources, preferably something better than allmusic. --neon white talk 18:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"We need... preferably something better than allmusic"? No, we don't. An allmusic is the very archetype of an RS in terms of whether bands are notable. tomasz. 19:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Esradekan & F. D. Kirtaran. tomasz. 19:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:07, 14 August 2008 (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.