Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southern Halo (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 move to draft space. (non-admin closure) Kharkiv07 (T) 13:14, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article can now be found at Draft:Southern Halo (band). Kharkiv07 (T) 13:18, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Halo (band)[edit]

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

Tagged with {{notability}}. I dream of horses (T) @ 16:35, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (T) @ 16:35, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (T) @ 16:35, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't agree with the nominator that "Tagged with {{notability}}" is a valid reason for deletion (there are over 60,000 such articles). However, this band does not appear to meet any of the notability criteria outlined in WP:BAND and most of the references are not independent of the subject. Gnome de plume (talk) 16:42, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No reputable sources provided, and none of the sources provided speak to notability. 1st reference is self-published, 2nd doesn't mention them, 3rd doesn't even provide enough information to unambiguously identify a source, 4th is just a calendar entry. WP:TOOSOON. ubiquity (talk) 16:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do Not Delete: There are 10 sources, several awards won, a radio single (Music Row is not a calendar entry; it's a genre-based magazine), a music video playing across all country music TV/online stations, and notable names surrounding the band. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JIS130 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If consensus is to delete, I urge the closing admin to incubate the article back to the Draft: namespace instead of delete it outright. Yes, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. However, it is not improbable that the band will become notable under WP:BAND #2 or #11 once its single is released. To that end, we're better off to have the text to be working on, rather than having to start from scratch. —C.Fred (talk) 18:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:24, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft and userfy as I found nothing to suggest better. SwisterTwister talk 05:24, 25 September 2015 (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.