Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sleazycheeks

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 redirect to Basement Jaxx discography. MBisanz ^talk 03:02, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sleazycheeks

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

I have been unsuccessful in trying to establish the notability of this subject. Lachlan Foley (talk) 05:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Easily verified notability. Google mentions books reviewing them that were published to the Library of Congress, Amazon, there's professionally made music videos, vice.com has articles on them etc. [1], which lead me to [2]. Other mentions: guardian.com[3], MTV[www.mtv.com/artists/basement-jaxx], Rolling Stone Mag [4], the BBC [5] -- IamM1rv (talk) 14:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that those reliable sources you've linked (Rolling Stone, BBC, The Guardian) mention "sleazycheeks" or "sleazy" anything.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:53, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Basement Jaxx discography. I'd also recommend bundling some of these nominations. Note that the notability of the band is not in question here just this specific release from the band. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 15:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon 01:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources found by IamM1rv Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do those sources mention sleazycheeks?Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources provided above - Notability is there. –Davey2010^Talk 12:33, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do those reliable sources (Rolling Stone, BBC, The Guardian) mention "sleazycheeks" or "sleazy" anything?Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:57, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Anythingyouwant - My bad I or Lugnuts should've looked - Anyway the sources don't even mention "Sleazycheeks! - Well spotted Anythingyouwant. –Davey2010^Talk 18:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per User :Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. Also, I don't see that the reliable sources cited here (Rolling Stone, BBC, The Guardian) mention "sleazycheeks" or "sleazy" anything.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:53, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all to Basement Jaxx discography as Davey2010 (talk · contribs) pointed out. WP:NALBUM and WP:GNG are not met in this particular case, and the sources given by IamM1rv (talk · contribs) are either directory listings or mentions of the band. Furthermore, this nomination has been applied to the following AfDs, as well (instead of having them all be on a nice, single AfD), and the same arguments and rationales are pretty much being shared by the same participants (e.g., people arguing "keep" because they're assuming that the albums inherit the band's notability).

Cheers --slakr^\ talk / 19:33, 16 May 2015 (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.