- 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. would be SK#1: nom withdrawn, but there is a deletion argument (albeit rejected) (non-admin closure) czar · · 19:13, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Mixel Pixel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable, no third party references, written like a PR puff piece. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 06:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete as per CSD:G11, tagged as such. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have removed that Speedy notice. This is an article about a US-based band originally contributed by an active editor who appears to be New Zealand based, which suggests that at the least it is not unambiguous advertising or promotion per G11. As to the article itself, as can be seen from the references, the band has a biographical article on Allmusic and reviews (albeit brief) in reputable newspapers. Whether that is enough to confirm notability, I am dubious, but it does suggest that AfD is the right place for that discussion/decision. AllyD (talk) 12:02, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 14:14, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JohnCD (talk) 19:50, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep http://pitchfork.com/artists/2966-mixel-pixel/ [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 86.42.93.209 (talk) 22:39, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and withdraw nomination: looks like I was wrong and there is ample material to establish notability. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 04:00, 29 May 2013 (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.