Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pink Project

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 no consensus with WP:NPASR. So Why 09:53, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Project

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

Contested PROD. The editor contesting the PROD claims the band is a one-hit-wonder, but the band does not even have a hit. If they did, they would meet notability criteria. As it is, the band fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO (as Pink Project) and no RSes could be found in a Google search. Italian site has no better refs. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:03, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:23, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:24, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The band did have one hit, "Disco Project", in Italy and Switzerland. Please see http://hitparade.ch/song/Pink-Project/Disco-Project-881 - #2 in 1982. Ugo1970 (talk) 23:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Did indeed have a hit, as mentioned above, and so qualifies under WP:NMUSIC#2. Needs serious trimming, though. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 20:19, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete WP:NMUSIC indicates that meeting one of its criteria may be grounds for inclusion. Their hit song was on the Swiss chart for nine weeks, with three weeks as #2. I am concerned about the lack of coverage of the band in reliable sources. --Bejnar (talk) 22:26, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD2014 talk contribs 00:21, 12 June 2017 (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.