Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pyorrhoea

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 keep. John254 00:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pyorrhoea

Fails WP:MUSIC standards. Non notable label and google hits only show few band links, while the other links are about the disease. Delete Undeath (talk) 05:01, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A7 Note that Empire Records page isn't even about a label. No assertation of notability whatsoever. So tagged. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 06:12, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak neutral per Ecoleetage's finds. I'm not fully convinced, but they may just make it. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 17:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Side note: link to a Polish Empire Records (label) has been red-linked already. -- User:Poeticbent

A7 No assertion of notability and, as TenPoundHammer said, Empire Records links to some random sitcom. —Atyndall ^{[citation needed]} 07:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The band has an album coming out in the U.S. in September [1]. The "Empire Records" in question is a Polish label, not a U.S. label [2]; I will fix the link in the article. When considering articles about bands from the non-Anglophonic world, putting aside a bit more time for research is advisable. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:08, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per A7 In order to qualify under criterion 5 of WP:MUSIC, the group would need to have issued two albums via a major label or better known indie label - they have not. LuciferMorgan (talk) 14:32, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. —_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Good coverage at NeuFutur Magazine. The article needs to be properly developed, that's all. --Poeticbent talk 17:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria you're citing says that a group may be notable if they have "been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable". Can you prove that NeuFutur complies with WP:RS, and offer other links (to comply with the demand for "multiple non-trivial published works")? LuciferMorgan (talk) 19:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More links Coverage from the metal review site Live 4 Metal (a well-regarded online media source for this music genre) has been added to the External Links section of the article. The band has also been featured on the bonus CD that accompanied the DVD release of the Metalmania 2005 concert -- see here: [3]. That was released by MVD, a major indie label. I would be impressed if more people made an effort to enhance the article, rather than erase it. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: regardless of the label notability the inclusion of 2+ reliable sources about the band passes WP:MUSIC. Ironho lds 14:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notability has been confirmed. Director33 (talk) 02:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I saw these guys at MetalMania. They are very well known in Poland and Central Europe. Forego (talk) 00:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:MUSIC. Three notable reviews usually do the trick. No one can cheat the music until one knows what to play. Can't say the same about the literary essays. greg park avenue (talk) 17:49, 30 July 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.