Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Identically Different

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. Randykitty (talk) 13:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Identically Different

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

Band appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:NBAND. I can find no reliable sources providing non-trivial coverage, only a couple of blogs. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 20:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - notability not evidenced or even claimed, really ("reached mild popularity"??). PK T(alk) 13:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I like "chart position = ?" even better... Bearcat (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No substantive or properly sourced claim of notability here. That said, band member Jesse Labelle does have an article of his own — which is also pretty damn badly sourced, but does make an actual notability claim (charting singles) that passes WP:NMUSIC and is thus flagged for ref cleanup rather than outright deletion. Probably the best solution, thus, would be to redirect this to him (at least until he gets deleted as unsourceable too...) Bearcat (talk) 01:26, 21 September 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.