Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/208 Talks of Angels


 * 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.  Sandstein  21:05, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

208 Talks of Angels

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The sheer volume of "references here" (which include a number of "twitter" and "facebook" links, among many others) makes me think we have a case of WP:CITEOVERKILL. Is there real independent and non-trivial coverage in reliable sources (not counting twitter, et al.)?? If so, which one are they? KDS 4444 Talk  15:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  15:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

208 Talks of Angels

Well, you want to say that Alan Cross (http://ajournalofmusicalthings.com/russian-band-records-with-pearl-jam-drummer-and-who-keyboardist/)

Newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/pop/kramms-hits/hoerproben/kramms-hits-when-she-cried-von-208-talks-of-angels-11992864.html)

BBC interview (http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/multimedia/2014/06/140630_bbseva_angels_band.shtml)

or The Guardian note (http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2015/jul/31/reviewanything-this-week-a-t-shirt-a-man-screaming-jeremy-corbyns-face-and-more)

are not reliable sources? If these are not reliable - what sources are reliable?

Please, remove your notification and this discussion dear friend. Live and let others live. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suffocator (talk • contribs) 12:57, 9 February 2016‎


 * A deletion discussion is not an opportunity for "live and let live" argument (see WP:MERCY). Your first link is to a personal website written by someone named Alan Cross— it appears to be written by him alone, with no editorial oversight.  Also, the article could not be more cursory: it is one paragraph in which, granted, he does mention the band.  But a one-paragraph article on a personal website does not carry much weight for a notability argument.  The second link you have provided, to Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, isn't a "newspaper", it's another website, and it's a single paragraph which only mentions this band in its title, nowhere in the paragraph's text! (which seems to be a only brief musing by the author on the nature of Russian rock music).  The third link you provided is to an article titled "Review Anything" which also includes a review of a McDonald's tee-shirt, a review of an image of Spongebob Squarepants, and a review of a musician screaming for 15 seconds (I kid you not).  Though this happens somehow under the "culture" section of the Guardian should be regarded as humorous, not evidence of notability.  If this is the best that can be produced to show evidence of notability for this particular band, then the scale is not tipping in its favor yet.  Also: I am sorry, but I cannot "remove" my nomination of this article for deletion: now that it has been nominated, the nomination is expected to run its course, one way or the other.  KDS 4444  Talk  21:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment for what it's worth, the online Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung is the web version of the famous newspaper. According to thedeWP article on it, the webedition is independently edited, but it has much more authority than just a blog.  DGG ( talk ) 18:46, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * (Ok, I will grant you that, DGG... though I think you will agree with me that the article in this newspaper still does not cover the subject non-trivially and probably still doesn't, by itself, qualify the band as notable, yes?)  KDS 4444  Talk  00:03, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I deliberately made no comment on notability--it helps to have some feel for the subject, and rock bands is one where I don't. For example, I do not know in this field what sort of a review constitutes trivial and what constitutes significant coverage. But reading the FA article, the paragraph is apparently an introduction to the audio of a song, and I notice that we have articles on only 3 of the first 20 artists who are covered in that column, linked at the  bottom. I have not looked at the other references.   DGG ( talk ) 01:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I now did look at the BBC Russia ref, which is also a brief paragraph. The Guardian review is in a section devoted to miscellania  which readers requestthem to  review. Neither are impressive as sources.


 * Tentative Delete on the basis of the above.  DGG ( talk ) 04:03, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and draft and userfy at best because this particularly currently seems questionable overall, looking through the listed sources, with none of them imaginably better convincing for a currently better article. SwisterTwister   talk  01:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:11, 22 February 2016 (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.