Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reflection Velocity
- 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 speedily deleted A7, no meaningful assertion of significance in text but this is also a G11, blatant COI advertising. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Reflection Velocity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Recommending deletion. This is a music group that, as far as I can tell, fails WP:MUSIC, however the article's creator claims that the commercial release of the artist's music on iTunes and similar services constitutes notability. This was nominated for speedy under CSD A7, however the article's creator contests it. I felt that, under the circumstances, a nomination here was appropriate. AubreyEllenShomo (talk) 07:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC & WP:RS. And as per WP:CHART, iTunes does not establish notability. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 12:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A7 per tag already placed on page. Just releasing an album on iTunes doesn't make you notable. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 16:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I have to concur. Will let it be for now in case something turns up. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 17:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Unable to locate anything to suggest meeting WP:Music Cheers, Dlohcierekim 18:18, 7 June 2008 (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.