- 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. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 23:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- XTRIPx (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I do not believe this meets the criteria for inclusion based on notability, as it appears to be an article on a band with no claim to notability, nothing but primary self-published sources, and no claim to critical or commercial success. S.G.(GH) ping! 14:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Second relist rationale. Unsourced "high risk" (band) article. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 14 July 2010 (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.