Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Great Explainer

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 01:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Explainer[edit]

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

Non-notable band lacking independent non-trivial coverage. reddogsix (talk) 23:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Has minimal coverage in reliable sources. Punknews.org is a reliable source for staff reviews. Not completely sure, but I think this article may also be a reliable source. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:51, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable enough, says an album is about to released, I checked the website of the record company, but no mention of it. Move to userspace until the album and some notable national press he been provided. Karst 15:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 23:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nothing here rings the notability bell. The voluminous sources all fail WP:RS. A Google turned up nothing that would support a case for WP:N. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now, at least. An argument could be made that coverage on two punk music websites counts shows notability, but that's setting the bar too low. Overall seems to fail WP:Notability (music). TheBlueCanoe 07:16, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Alright, consensus looks like I was feeling too generous when I voted to keep on just one or two sources. I'm willing to admit that the band's notability is questionable enough to strike my vote. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2014 (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.