Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Divided Circle

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. — Cirt (talk) 07:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Divided Circle[edit]

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

Notability doubtful. Unreliable sources. The way the author keeps removing the maintenance templates, gives me the idea of self-promotion or a COI-problem. Night of the Big Wind (talk) 11:14, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, minimal EV, even the record company the band is signed to Lonely City Records don't seem to be a significant company, only have a myspace page. Fallschirmjäger ✉ 11:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting to see that the author also removed an AfD from Forensics ([1]) without adding really reliable sources and a speedy deletion request for Wrexile ([2]). It looks like he is creating articles to support The Divided Circle... Night of the Big Wind (talk) 15:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

YOU put in the speedy deletion request. And you did so in direct response to me linking it to The Divided Circle page - upon YOUR request. Also interesting to note that you marked my Wrexile page for speedy deletion within 30 seconds or something of me submitting it - so you couldn't even have read it properly, let alone checking any of the references. Do you get kicks from this stuff?

Also - why are the sources unreliable? And now you're accusing me of 'creating articles' myself? Why the hell would I do that?! Oh, and I removed the maintenance templates because (a) most of them were in no way relevant and (b) because I thought I'd fixed the others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miserable1 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About reading it properly: take a look who signed it! I have nothing to do with the speedy deletion.

About the template: as I said the sorurces you mention are not independent and reliable. Reviews from albums or download/orderpages are no reliable sources. Facebook, Soundcloud and Myspace idem dito. Did there albums or singles made it into the hitparade? That is usefull info to stave their notability! Is there anything known about "Lonely City Records"? Just a few hits, if you don't count Facebook, Soundcloud and Myspace (hey, where have I seen these names before?) Forensics and The Divided Circle have at least one musician in common. And Wrexile is so friendly to help both. Sorry, mate! But your reply on this only convinced me more about selfpromotion. Night of the Big Wind (talk) 20:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've never claimed I'm not trying to promote myself/ people I work with.... if there's something wrong with that then by all means delete all my contributions. Am officially passed caring! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miserable1 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This group does not appear to satisfy the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (music). --Noleander (talk) 02:11, 9 July 2011 (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.