Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polite Sleeper (3rd nomination)

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. Daniel (talk) 04:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Polite Sleeper

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Appears from google search to be non-notable. Everything I'm finding is just directory listings. I'm thinking in the ten-year test, not notable. —valereee (talk) 00:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there's just nothing here. No big record label, no hits, no nothing--and no coverage. Delete. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - pinging doomsdayer520 who did a lot of work on this when it was at AfD last time Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was back in 2010, when I was more of an inclusionist than I am now, while music notability guidelines were more lenient. At the time I believed the band had gotten some helpful reviews, but nothing has happened with them in the past 11 years while Wikipedia guidelines have gotten tougher. I will cast a true vote shortly. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I defended this article and added some sources back in 2010 when dinosaurs walked the Earth. Of the five sources added back then, four are now extra dead and one is only available via Web Archive. Furthermore, they were all from small and local media outlets, which was acceptable back then but not under the WP guidelines of 2021. There are still a few brief blog-like album reviews floating around, but the band now has no reliable coverage that has stood the test of time. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not seeing any real indication of lasting notability. Per above, the sources used in the article are all dead links, which, IMO, indicates a lack of importance. I could be convinced to change my mind, but im not going to put in the effort to try and save this article. Bonewah (talk) 15:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The band is not notable. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 06:22, 8 July 2021 (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.