Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VUVR

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. Expansion of the article during discussion has been sufficient to fulfill the criteria WP:MUSIC as indicated in the discussion below. Non-admin close. --jonny-m t 06:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VUVR[edit]

Seemingly non-notable band. Creator declined prod. Ghits are user-gen or irrelevant. tomasz. 11:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't get it. This article has sources on the page, but tomasz says it isn't notable. The band below has no sources, but tomasz says it is notable. Are VUVR's sources not reliable? Blast Ulna (talk) 12:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Precisely, yes. They are specialist metal sites which are pretty much dedicated to user-gen content for every metal band ever, and therefore on their own are no guarantee a band will be notable; whereas in the case of The Devastations (to which BlastUlna refers here), the article has no sources but on the other hand does have assertion of content which, when sourced, would make the article a no-brainer keep. The lack of sources in an article with such assertion should lead to: (a) a "more sources" tag; or (b) the addition of a source by the user identifying the problem. it is not a deletion criterion. tomasz. 13:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Blast Ulna (talk) 13:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I am here. I made the article. Where exactly do you think is the problem of the notability of VUVR?--Lykantrop ^(Talk) 17:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i don't think there's any indication that they meet these guidelines. tomasz. 17:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got 1 question - this statement: "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria" is on the top of the criteria. Doesnt it mean that a band needs to meet 1 or more of this criteria to be notable?--Lykantrop ^(Talk) 18:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes, you're right, that was confusing... i should have said "anything from these guidelines". sorry about that. tomasz. 19:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I was confused a little, because If it would be the other way, 95% of all bands in Wikipedia would have to be deleted. So I must say that VUVR meets several of these criteria easily. I will add more sources direct for some criteria. But I need to know how such a source, that shows VUVR's notability but is not cited in the text, should be put into the article?..--Lykantrop ^(Talk) 07:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did a small rewrite + new sources. VUVR passes from this criteria number 1, 4, 6, 7 would go, but I did not find sources anymore and 11 passes too but is hard to find out in a written form. So 3 criteria pass. Is it ok for you? I would not completely deny these specialist metal sites if they show professional album criticism.--Lykantrop ^(Talk) 15:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this discussion closed or not?--Lykantrop ^(Talk) 16:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets more than one of the criteria as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 23:06, 19 February 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.