Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swing Unlimited
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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) 02:33, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Swing Unlimited (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)
Can't find RS fail WP:BAND Weaponbb7 (talk) 02:26, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:JAZZ notified. AllyD (talk) 07:33, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There's some previous discussion around the need for reliable 3rd party references on Talk:Swing Unlimited. Sadly, neither the local references in the article nor evidence from a couple of searches (better as "Swing Unlimited Big Band", as there are groups of similar names in the USA) seem to establish notability so Delete. AllyD (talk) 11:09, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Question, this is a completely separate group, correct? SilverserenC 17:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You are right, this is a completely separate group, based in the US. There is no doubt that this article needs work as well as better referencing. The band has been placed under the Umbrella of The SUBB Group, a group of bands with the sole aim of improving the availability of Jazz in and around the community in the Bournemouth are of the UK. At the moment I do not have time to work on this article, but will try to do so in the next couple of weeks. I also have very little idea of the protocols involved here.Webchem (talk) 19:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:48, 18 September 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.