Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/18+ (band)


 * 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 - Article does needs improving but meets GNG. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 01:43, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

18+ (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can't find evidence of this band meeting WP:BAND and they only have one album (singles from it are included in the discography). Jerod Lycett (talk) 14:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  14:55, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Maybe your Google skills need work. I easily found coverage from the LA Weekly, The Guardian, The 405, Irish Times, and CLASH. Passes both WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC via significant coverage from three different countries. --Michig (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:02, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep – Meets WP:GNG. E.g., , , . North America1000 16:04, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I rarely agree with Michig about the notability of a band. We have very different ideas of what significant coverage means. In this case, we are in agreement. GNG is easily passed. Keep. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:38, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep As per Michig and NorthAmerica1000 meets WP:GNG and has notability.     WordSeventeen (talk) 22:58, 4 April 2015 (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.