- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Widescreen Mode (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable band. --Viennese Waltz 11:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Finland. Shellwood (talk) 11:57, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: If it's notable enough for Finnish Wikipedia, it's notable enough for the English one. Matter of fact, the Finnish article has sources that can be ported with proper translations to the English article. That Article Editing Guy (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- That is not how the English Wikipedia's notability guidelines work. Regardless, I don't think the sources on the Finnish page demonstrate notability per WP:GNG: one is a press release, three of them are links to music charts, and the last is the band's Facebook page. However, they may qualify through WP:MUSICBIO, criterion 2. ArcticSeeress (talk) 18:25, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: There are sources in the corresponding Finnish Wikipedia denoting notability which can be used to expand the article. Requires work though, but certainly not unnotable. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 12:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional discussion regarding how coverage in specific sources contribute towards notability would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:24, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I'm not sure what the above voters are referring to on the Finnish article. There are 5 sources, all of which don't count towards notability. I've included one additional source (blabbermouth.net) I managed to find below:
| Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 WordPress blog
|
|
✘ No | |
|
|
 Probably
|
Chart entry
|
✘ No | |
|
|
Probably
|
Chart entry
|
✘ No | |
|
|
Probably
|
Chart entry
|
✘ No | |
| Official Facebook page
|
Facebook post
|
Inaccessible and not archived
|
✘ No | |
|
|
Listed on WP:A/S
|
~ Focused on the band's album, not the band itself | ~ Partial | |
| This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. | ||||
- Even if we count blabbermouth.net as significant coverage, that is only one source that counts towards GNG. Yes, they could meet WP:NBAND because they charted on Finland's national chart, but there isn't enough coverage in reliable sources to write an article. At the moment, most of the article is unsourced original research. Charting does not mean a band is inherently notable or has to be kept; it just means there is usually enough coverage to write an article. C F A 💬 02:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per this. Ping me if something changes but these sources do not appear to contribute towards enough GNG for an article. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:28, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- 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.