Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aquaria (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The result was withdrawn by nominator -- lucasbfr  talk 20:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Aquaria (band)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails to assert notability. Clearly fails WP:BAND. Scarian Call me Pat 16:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC) Withdrawn - I appear to have made an error. My apologies. Scarian Call me Pat 19:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep The fact that three other Wikis have seen fit to include an article on the band makes me wonder what's wrong with us. Clearly have significant international recognition such as to merit inclusion. Chubbles (talk) 17:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - "Labels: Currently unsigned" - sure sign of lack of notability. They haven't released any notable records independently either. Scarian Call me Pat  17:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - I hardly think currently unsigned is a sure sign of a lack of notability. If there are three international articles, it would meet the standards for requested articles from other languages.  The languages are diverse enough I really doubt the same guy with a translator pushed them all through.  I think it's gotta be kept. matt91486 (talk) 17:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Every Wiki has different notability standards, I'm afraid. So that's not a hugely satisfying reason for a keep. Scarian Call me Pat  17:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * But it certainly should give one pause, even if circumstantial; if they're really musical nobodies, why are the Japanese and Hungarians paying attention? Also, being unsigned is not necessarily an indicator of non-notability; see, for instance, Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, Enter Shikari, Death in June... All had significant success without a label.Chubbles (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Those bands have achieved commercial success, though. Do you have any sources to suggest this band have? Funeral 18:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Article now has a biography from Rockdetector and a news article from Blabbermouth.net. Chubbles (talk) 18:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've also dug up yet another alternate language wiki. Which I know you say doesn't assert notability, but when it is considered fair enough in so many other languages, it definitely warrants some consideration.  I'll continue looking for other sources too.  I'm definitely of the opinion that if a subject is considered notable in now 4 other languages, it probably can be shown to be notable here.  One key will be searching for information under their old name, Uirapuru.  There might be some stuff online under that name. matt91486 (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete per nom, fails WP:MUSIC. Other Wikis shouldn't be used as a claim for notability, none of them assert notability or cite any sources. Funeral 18:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Here are some more sources. I'll leave them to you if you think they meet the requirements, but this is what I've been able to find.  This may or may not be considered a substantial enough.  What is the position on E-Zines?  I've never cited one before, so I'm not sure if they count, I have a suspicion that they are considered to.  If they do, there's a mention of them under their old band name here.  And another here. matt91486 (talk) 18:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That last one might be alright, I wouldn't class it as completely reliable though. The other two aren't so hot. Scarian Call me Pat  19:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, even if you only add the one, we've got the two that Chubbles found. That gives three sources, which should be plenty. matt91486 (talk) 19:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Also important, the previous AfD was not brought to attention. Previous AfD discussion.  There was a keep vote then.  This should have been brought up with the nomination. matt91486 (talk) 19:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep; sources identified here and at the first AFD identify nontrivial press coverage, so they meet WP:MUSIC#1. It's odd for all the interwikis there isn't one in Portuguese. Appearance of interwikis, btw, is not a claim of notability, but it is an indication that it merits care looking for potential sources. However, I've seen inappropriate articles spammed onto many Wikipedias at once, so it doesn't even mean it meets their requirements, which are generally similar to ours. I don't think we can speedy keep from the withdrawn nom with the stong delete opinion. Rigadoun (talk) 19:56, 4 January 2008 (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.