Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead rose complex

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. Sr 13 02:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dead rose complex

Self-declared "largely inactive" musical group, no assertion of notability. Speedy tag removed twice, so here we are in AfD-land. DMacks 00:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete Non-notable. And anyways, shouldn't the title be Dead Rose Complex? (lemonflash)^talk 00:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per CSD A7. Also warn the people removing the Speedy tags. I've also warned the anon IP who was removing talk from the talk page regarding the band lack of notability. Wildthing61476 01:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of simply nominating our page for deletion, how about some helpful suggestions? We did not create this page to "advertise" our band. We simply thought this would be a great place for individuals to view an official description/biography of the band from a noteworthy source. All of the information included is accurate and we intended to add reviews and other information shortly. Could someone please explain precisely what is wrong with these intentions aside from "no assertion of notability?" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DamienRose (talk • contribs).

If you need to use Wikipedia to be a noteworthy source, then the band doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Review WP:BAND to show what criteria are required to be included on Wikipedia. Also, just doing a Google search for "Dead Rose Complex" returns exactly 2 hits, not a good sign for notability. Wildthing61476 01:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have some WP:RS reviews, please add them to the article ASAP...that would support this as being a notable enough band to be included on Wikipedia. DMacks 01:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DMacks. We appreciate CONSTRUCTIVE criticism and reviews will be added ASAP.

Please see Wikipedia:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!. Essentially, you need to have been reviewed non-trivially by mainstream media outlets, the more prominent the better. We certainly encourage everyone to contribute, but we are an encyclopedia, not a webspace provider, so we have standards and guidelines the community has adopted to determine what belongs. --Dhartung | Talk 01:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as no sources have yet been provided demonstrating notability per Wikipedia guidelines. --Dhartung | Talk 01:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed the musical criteria for notability in the Wikipedia guidelines and I see that our sources are likely not reputable enough to remain in the wikipedia (as of yet). Both my bandmate and I are currently completing our graduate degrees at Wright State University and we understand the use of appropriate citations. However, as mentioned, we have not been reviewed by Rolling Stone or any other periodicle of this magnitude. Our reviews come from underground goth sites and random fans. We will leave this matter to review process and will be otherwise unoffended if the page is removed at this time. --User:DamienRose

Just to let you know, the website you linked to in the article is no longer available. Wildthing61476 01:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of our best reviews and the site is no longer available...Thank you for bringing that to my attention.--User:DamienRose

delete Just don't need this article; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Astroview120mm (talk • contribs).
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions. -- -- pb30<talk> 02:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn. JJL 03:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:MUSIC, and one of the most egregious and blatant WP:COI cases in recent memory. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 04:02, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If only all COI editors were as forthright and reasonable. There is no prohibition against writing your own article, only a recommendation against it. --Dhartung | Talk 10:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. As per nom. Fails WP:Notability.--Edtropolis 15:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete into a bloody pulp per all the above. Doczilla 09:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ow. My ears....--Mike18xx 08:48, 18 June 2007 (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.