Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bad Ronald (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 needs work, though. Tone 09:01, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Bad Ronald (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I remember these guys, but after an exhaustive Gsearch, I could find no sources indicating that they ever actually charted. (I didn't notify the article creator because s/he created the article in November 2007 and hasn't been on Wikipedia since.)  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 04:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 04:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - Found a music review and an Allmusic biography (although it is not exactly a novel) but not much else, just trivial mentions/name checks, articles about the film instead and the usual streaming sites/retail sites/databases/blogs. Maybe there are print sources from back then but I can't track them down as I am not keen on it. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 07:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination: falls short of WP:NMUSICIAN. Can we bundle Bad Ronald (album) in with this nomination? ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 07:21, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that the article creator made the article, and then disappeared permanently. Possibly conflict of interest? Even if not, Delete based on grounds nom has already covered. Foxnpichu (talk) 10:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - There are Village Voice and CMJ reviews, among others. Here's a feature that mentions both Bad Ronald and Little T, ironically.  These albums were released in the early 2000s, when the music industry was still relatively strong, and labels would have ensured that there was coverage. I prefer album articles, but, again, many editors prefer band ones. Caro7200 (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Doesn't seem like enough if you ask me. Foxnpichu (talk) 10:35, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, there's AllMusic (twice), Village Voice, CMJ, Orlando Sentinel (twice), OC Weekly, The Tennessean, St. Cloud Times--that's without going into periodical databases. While not generally used as sources, around 10 college newspapers covered the band. I barely remember them and have never listened to them, but they were on a major label, employed a notable producer, and had a minor hit. I believe that more coverage exists outside of 10-12 Google pages. Caro7200 (talk) 13:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Speaking of AllMusic though, much of what is in the article appears to be lifted directly from that website.  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 02:52, 7 September 2020 (UTC)


 * keep Considering their lack of accomplishment one could fairly argue they are not notable enough to merit encyclopedic importance, yet they do meet criteria per coverage (albeit marginal in content--but in strong sources) and major label affiliation (which, combined with the coverage is a large nod in their favor.) ShelbyMarion (talk) 17:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the identification in this discussion of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as Village Voice, CMJ, AllMusic, Orlando Sentinel and others that shows a pass of WP:GNG, in my view Atlantic306 (talk) 23:08, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per identified reliable sources. — Toughpigs (talk) 03:41, 7 September 2020 (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.