Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slipknot Demo (2nd 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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 08:31, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Slipknot Demo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

It has been suggested during a GAN that this article may not be notable enough. Nergaal (talk) 19:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 20:16, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the first AfD just ended yesterday and I still feel the same way. As stated in that discussion: "This demo has recieved "independent coverage in reliable sources" from MTV, as well as coverage two books about the band which are atleast second party coverage. This article has better coverage and referencing, not to mention length and verifiability that the vast majority of demo articles on WP. Not to mention the band's notability in itself; if it were from a band that has had no sucess, then I wouldn't be so supporting, but Slipknot has debuted in the top five of the Billboards and many other countries' charts multiple times, we should do well to present their full history." Blackngold29 20:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would also like to comment that I do not feel the nominator has allowed "a reasonable amount of time to pass before nominating the same page for deletion again" as should be done per the WP:DP. Blackngold29 20:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Question Articles that don't have a clear consensus are quite often relisted twice, but the first nomination was only relisted once. Wouldn't it be reasonable to treat this as a second relisting? Nyttend (talk) 20:33, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The band is notable, the album has several mentions in reliable secondary sources, ad infinitum, as per the same stuff I said for their other album deletion. Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 01:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As I said before, in the last Afd for this article, I have created a page for this demo on wikia.com. They have a wiki dedicated to the band there. I am one of the few contributors trying to expand that wiki, but I made an article for this page there. Bramblestar (ShadowClan Leader) (talk) 21:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't believe that other Wikis should have any effect on Wikipedia; their existance is irrelevent and I don't see this as a legitimate grounds for deletion as there is no deletion policy concerning other wikis. Blackngold29 23:28, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 02:01, 16 October 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.