Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auramics


 * 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:43, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Auramics

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable music group. No reliable independent refs indicate notability, not could I find any. The article consists solely of a series of unsubstantiated comparisons to notable people and a huge notability section - and there the references are primary or to non-notable blogs. RichardOSmith (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: see also Articles for deletion/Oramics (band). RichardOSmith (talk) 20:44, 26 December 2015 (UTC)


 * This Canadian blog is one of the top blogs in canada very well known in this circle of music.
 * Well known canadian blog that is on hype machine:
 * Auramics top 100 tracks of the year
 * Well known english blog for this psych/hauntology genre if you don't know the genre they are well known in this genre:
 * Well known music chart site in Athens Greece
 * Well known radio station in Greece
 * Auramics on NYU's radio station
 * Auramics in New York radio station sonic pilgrin
 * Auramics song on XSounds with record label Burlei
 * Auramics is notable.


 * — Turquoisesummer (talk) 20:49, 26 December 2015 (UTC) — Turquoisesummer (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardOSmith (talk • contribs) 2015-12-26T21:51:42

— User:Kashmiri made a quiet edit to the previous contribution without leaving a signature on 2015-12-27T18:38:11‎. This quiet edit was to strikeout the comment. I have reverted the stikeout, and added an unsigned template for a spa tag added by User:RichardOSmith. See WP:TPO. Unscintillating (talk) 00:32, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment An article about this band with a slightly different spelling was deleted in this AfD - cf this and the sources there. I'll request a speedy deletion as a repost. --bonadea contributions talk 21:07, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry, I did not see that this was already mentioned - the link to the previous AfD had been removed and was restored while I was writing the above. Delete at any rate, preferrably speedily. --bonadea contributions talk 21:11, 26 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I am reversing this speedy deletion for this band Auramics, because it is in fact a notable band in the hauntology/radiophonic genre which is a very small genre of music. 21:09, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Echoechoradar (talk) — Echoechoradar (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Auramics is listed in the genre of music hauntology it is indeed notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Echoechoradar (talk • contribs) 21:19, 26 December 2015 (UTC)


 * No, a mention in a Wikipedia article is never a proof of notability, not the way Wikipedia defines notability at any rate. Especially when it was the creator of the articles about this band who added the band name to the other Wikipedia article... --bonadea contributions talk 21:23, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree, this genre is niche and small and Auramics is notable. 21:25, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Echoechoradar (talk)
 * Bands that are not "pop" music on pitchfork still can be popular among said circles whom invented such genres. Ie. Hauntology Radiophonic.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Echoechoradar (talk • contribs) 21:31, 26 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I vote to keep Auramics. Agreed with EchoechoRadar, its notable among those genres. 21:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Analogsynth (talk) — Analogsynth (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete: Does not pass WP:GNG, and is severely lacking any secondary reliable references. Closing admin, please take into account the level of meat/sock -puppetry -- samtar whisper 22:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree with whisper. Just because "reliable sources" are not pitchfork, does not mean a band isn't notable. That Canadian blog is one of the 10 biggest indie blogs in Canada and those radio stations are legitimate radio stations. Undelete. 22:24, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Echoechoradar (talk)


 * Auramics approved as reliable. Someone please edit for grammar however. 22:28, 26 December 2015 (UTC)Pandoraofwiki (talk)  — Pandoraofwiki (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment - See this SPI.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:36, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: SPI moved to here. -- Finngall  talk  19:01, 27 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: Plenty of credible sources. Soulseek324 (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2015 (UTC) — Soulseek324 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete: Potential sockpuppetry to keep this article alive. Also fails WP:GNG. Dat GuyTalkContribs 12:39, 27 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete doesn't pass notability cOrneLlrOckEy (talk) 00:08, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom and above fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:40, 2 January 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.