Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beheaded Children Contest


 * 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 all. Consensus for deletion is clear. BD2412 T 02:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Infection (Band) and other albums created by the band

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Reason: Fails WP:NALBUM, and a non notable band. 100.37.166.70 (talk) 00:25, 23 August 2020 (UTC) Nomination on behalf of IP. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nominator note Added more articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.37.166.70 (talk • contribs) 01:56, August 23, 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Peru-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:39, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 15:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support Not notable in the slightest. Could probably even go for a speedy delete? ItsPugle (please use  on reply) 00:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Article does not meet A9 in a sense that the creator also made an article for the band. Suppose you nominate that too? On a secon note, I tagged the article as CSD A7. 100.37.166.70 (talk) 00:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Nominator note All albums and the band Infection (Band) nominated for deletion. Can you move this under Infection (Band)? Thanks, 100.37.166.70 (talk) 01:01, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Erm you nominated Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion but I can add a tag to the band as a multi-article AFD --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 02:01, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Edit: I see you already did that --Tyw7</i> (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 02:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - This process sure is a mess. For future reference, it is not even required to tie related AfDs together when you could just reference the others in a "see also" comment at the top of each one. Linking AfDs together is supposed to result in convenience, not this clustercluck in which the interested voter has to figure out if the band is being discussed, or one of their albums, or several of their albums, etc. And why in the world has this discussion been del-sorted to the Sexuality page? --- <b style="color: DarkOrchid"> DOOMSDAYER 520</b> (Talk&#124;Contribs) 15:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , I sorted to the sexuality sorting because Beheaded Children Contest, the initial article nominated had a rather suggestive song titles. When I nominated on behalf of IP, he just listed one article Beheaded Children Contest. Then when I was offline, he edited my nomination and tagged on the other articles, making it the mess you see right now.--<i style="font-family:'Rock salt','Comic Sans MS'; color: Green;">Tyw7</i> (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 17:24, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Consider the following. The Bands/Musicians del-sort page is perused by editors like those here, who know how to assess whether a band is notable. The Sexuality del-sort page deals with articles on human sexuality and the editors there know whether a topic in that realm is notable. You have wasted their time listing an article about a band with one jokey song title that is distantly related to sex. Just like time would be wasted at the Bands/Musicians page if an article about an obscure fungus was listed just because its name looks a little like a musical term. Unnecessary del-sorting is just another addition to this mess. --- <b style="color: DarkOrchid"> DOOMSDAYER 520</b> (Talk&#124;Contribs) 00:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete all: Infection (Band), Acrotomophile Mutilator (album), and Beheaded Children Contest (album). I have no doubt that this band has fans in their local scene, but their article severely exaggerates the coverage they have received. Their "coverage" in magazines like Metal Hammer and Decibel consists of brief mentions in articles that are about other bands or events. The footnote to Revolver is a story in which their gross-out album cover was noted but the writer did not know who the band was due to their incomprehensible logo. Other media mentions are brief listings of compilation albums in which they appeared. Their AllMusic and Metal Archives entries are blank with no history or critical coverage. The only remotely informative media source I could find is a new album announcement here:, and they have no coverage of any significant or reliable nature. --- <b style="color: DarkOrchid"> DOOMSDAYER 520</b> (Talk&#124;Contribs) 15:54, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - per Doomsdayer520 The band was included in the Metal Hammer CD "Riffs Around the World: Planet Metal" . That's an achievement, not just a "brief mention." In the same line, Decibel Magazine reviewed their 12" LP, it wasn't a casual mention, journalist Shane Mehling actually wrote about the album. Ukraine's metal magazine Atmosfear also reviewed the band's second album . Finally, they were also included in the Zero Tolerance cover-mount CD . No other Peruvian metal band has received that kind of international press until this day. Unfortunately those are printed magazines, and they update their websites constantly, so it is difficult to find old articles, hence the need of page scans. Best killthepixelnow (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 01:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete all per Doomsdayer520's incisive comments. It looks like page creator had a near-identically titled page speedily deleted 11 years ago. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:25, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Doomsdayer and Dom Kaos. No evidence of notability. A blank Allmusic page is always a bad sign. Metal Archives wouldn't be reliable even if there would be a biography. Couldn't find anything besides their official sites, facebook, Metal Archives, and (reprinted press releases) about their albums. The article is also "sourced" to unreliable sites only. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 20:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Doomsdayer. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:01, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete half the references are to the bands own website, the others not particularly notable. One of the articles merely notes one of their album covers being tasteless! Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - per GhostDestroyer100. The article is about a band that has 14 year of history. They played in international venues, opening for acts such as Suffocation, Malevolent Creation , Vomitory , Venom Inc. , and Disgrace and Terror . Best killthepixelnow (talk)
 * Comment - per Doomsdayer520 The band has received local and international coverage in Necromance Magazine (Spain), Friedhof Magazine (Spain) , Metal Temple (Greece) , Pest Webzine (Romania) , El Comercio (Peru) , Dargedik (Peru) , among many other printed and digital platforms. Best killthepixelnow (talk)
 * Comment To give this AfD a fair hearing, it is probably worthwhile for someone who can read these languages to make an objective evaluation of these sources. I only read English, but just out of curiosity in clicking the links within the first of those mentioned (Necromance Magazine) it doesn't seem to have a particularly large following based on the number of people who engage with it on it's various social media sites. Take that for what it's worth. ShelbyMarion (talk) 21:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment per ShelbyMarion Death metal bands remain, usually, in the underground metal scene. Still, this band has received world-wide coverage from magazines, zines, and blogs all around the word. This is a small list:
 * MetalBite (USA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Killthepixelnow (talk • contribs) 00:15, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Masterful Magazine (Poland)
 * Spirit of Metal (France)
 * Metal.de (Germany) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Killthepixelnow (talk • contribs) 01:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Pest Webzine (Poland)
 * Twilight Magazine (Germany)
 * Panzerfaust Zine (Poland)
 * From Beyond Metal Fanzine (Venezuela)
 * Stormbringer (Austria)
 * Metal Glory (Germany)
 * Metal Underground (Austria)
 * Metal Invader (Greece)
 * Eternal Terror (Norway)
 * Brutalism (Germany)
 * Zigi's Metal Corner (Germany)
 * Best killthepixelnow (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - per Deathlibrarian There are external sources, but I guess it is also advisable to source the band's website. Those links you mention can be easily removed without affecting the final result. Best killthepixelnow (talk)
 * Comment I don't know. Most of these sites look like blogs to me. I know some of them (Metal.de, Spirit of Metal, Stormbringer, Metal Underground, Masterful Magazine) but I think only Metal.de is reliable from all of these. So we have one reliable source (Metal.de) but one source is not enough. It seems like they are pretty popular, having toured with all of those big names (I have never heard about "Disgrace and Terror" though) and it seems like this band is popular in the underground (although I have never heard of them despite liking several underground metal bands myself - but that's not the point, sorry), and they have gotten some coverage from ezines and blogs but I am still not convinced of their notability. Btw, death metal is not limited to the underground for a long time now - there are lots of death metal bands that broke into the mainstream and have coverage in reliable sources. With all respect to this band, unfortunately, they are among the truly underground ones that only very few people know and thus are not notable for WP inclusion because they haven't been covered by reliable sources. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 09:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - per GhostDestroyer100 - "Articles should be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." I concur that Metal.de, Spirit of Metal, and Masterful Magzine are well-reputed and independent publications. I got a question: Why is that Metal Hammer, Decibel (magazine) and El Comercio (Peru) are not being taken into consideration to ponder the relevance of the article. Those also count as reliable, independent, and published sources.


 * Another comment - Killthepixelnow seems to be directing comments toward me as the first detailed voter, so I checked out the new sources. Killthepixelnow is arguing that the band has received "coverage" but has missed the fact that this term has a distinct meaning in Wikipedia. "Coverage" must be in reliable sources that are independent of the band and its own promotional efforts, and even if they appear in such sources, the "coverage" must discuss the band in a significant fashion. From the new list supplied by Killthepixelnow, we can see that the band has been listed in album directories, mentioned in social media, discussed by bloggers, uploaded to YouTube, etc. etc. Very little of that is reliable, independent, or significant coverage under Wikipedia's definitions. Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedic resource in which people/things have to qualify for inclusion. And calling for sympathy because they are tragically "underground" won't help either. --- <b style="color: DarkOrchid"> DOOMSDAYER 520</b> (Talk&#124;Contribs) 13:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - per Doomsdayer520 My point is, the links and sources listed are reliable, in so far as they are not connected to the band. Perhaps, the right term is not "coverage," as you already said. The term underground was mentioned to stress the fact some publication (magazines, fanzines, blogs, websites) and bands might be obscure to some people, but they exist nevertheless. and count as reliable sources. Let us take Cuero Negro Magazine as an example. It is the oldest metal fanzine in Peru, and it goes back to 1988 . The aforementioned publication included the band in their XVI edition . That is a reliable source, yet very underground. Best killthepixelnow (talk)


 * Comment - Yes, Metal Hammer and Decibel Mag are reliable sources. But the thing is, they just mention the band among other things which is not coverage in the slightest (although Doomsdayer also mentioned this). The El Comercio album review looks great but the url says "blog" and there are loads of links to the social media/streaming entries of the band which is not a good sign as probably the one who wrote the article was paid money to write the article so the band can get advertised. If it's not true, I am sorry if I am accusing someone. But blogs are not considered as reliable sources on WP, that's a golden rule here. Like I said I actually think Metal.de is a RS (reliable source), I am still not convinced by Spirit of Metal (I have used them a lot and they have that "database feeling" and the information (e.g. the year the band was formed) is often confusing. Real magazines like Metal Hammer and the like wouldn't allow this. The rest of the sources you presented all look like WordPress sites to me, even Masterful Magazine (which like I said, I know) so that's not a good sign either because blogs are not RS. So to summarize, I am still not convinced. Update: It's all clear now. "Killthepixelnow" is obviously affiliated with the band. Their "Beheaded Children Contest" album was mixed at a studio called "Kill the Pixel Now". The user is probably the producer or someone else, but he is certainly affiliated with this group. That's why he fights so hard to keep the article. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - I am glad you take the time to explain those things. In regard to the official website of El Comercio, they allocate many different contents in their digital version. "Headbangers" is a music section devoted to the metal scene in general with particular interesst in local productions. It belongs to the digital version of the site, but they labelled it as blog when the "blog hype" mushroomed. As you might now, it is customary to include extra digital content (links to the band's website and videos if they have) in music reviews, so I do not see that as odd (Pitchfork and Rolling Stone do that, for instance.) Apart from that, I note there is a disdain in general for blogs, as not being reliable sources. I beg to differ, for the platform does not invalidate the contents that appear on them. Developing a "real" website costs a lot of money, that I know for sure because I am on that industry. So magazines that don't have a big budget rely on technologies such as Wordpress and Wix to develop their projects, because it is economically more viable. You might be surprised to hear that Harvard University website is actually based on Wordpresss technology. Of course, it doesn't look like the typicall Wordpress template, but it's a WP template, just highly customised to hide its nature. So, if someone cite a resource found in Harvard's website, would it be accepted or not? The bottom line is content should be relevant, in spite of the technology in which is based. Lots of "academics" (quotation marks required) despised Wikipedia when it began because it was "just a website." And here we are now, still discussing.


 * Comment Interesting thoughts. I did not know that the website of Harvard University is based on WordPress technology too. That surprised me for sure. As for the rest of it, you speak the truth and it was fun to read it. As for the band, I am not certain the article will stay but others will tell. I don't have anything else to comment. Oh yeah, I got one: These are all the reliable and unreliable sources that should/shouldn't be used when writing a WP article on a band/album. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 20:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks for the information, that's a rather useful resource!


 * Keep all: They have received some coverage. As for the links indicated by killthepixelnow, the Facebook, YouTube and Blogspot links have to go. And so does their website, which is a primary source. The rest of the links seem to be reliable.
 * I also found some reliable sources which talk about the albums.
 * Acrotomophile Mutilator:, , , , , , and.
 * Beheaded Children Contest:, , , , and.
 * With these, the articles of the Band and both Albums are good enough to pass WP:NBAND and WP:NALBUM respectively. ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 12:00, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Good advice, thanks. All primary sources were removed from the articles, to make them more objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Killthepixelnow (talk • contribs) 20:42, August 29, 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete A lot of these references are in-world blogs and fail WP:NOT, being self-published and not under editorial control. There is no coverage whatsoever. There is no real depth. Nobody is listening to them on Spotify, SoundCloud, Apple Music, Youtube or Deezer. They are ultraobscure. Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:SIGCOV.   scope_creep Talk  18:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It is a failure to launch scenario.   scope_creep Talk  18:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 *  Keep all Comment: Once again, I do not see why the disdain against some type of publications. Perhaps from your standpoint the article deals with a obscure band, but it has been proven with the references above their albums were reviewed by sources such as Decibel Magazine, El Comercio (Peru) , metal.de , and Necromance Magazine  (among others.) Sure, they are not popular as Cannibal Corpse, but it is not as if the band is not relevant, at last for a certain niche. As for the digital presence, last time I checked their albums had around 40,000 streams in the past two months, and the reproduction count for one of their songs is above 664,800. That is only in Spotify , so I do not see real data to support the argument "Nobody is listening to them." I think enough evidence has been presented so as to pass WP:NBAND and WP:NALBUM. Regards Killthepixelnow (talk) 04:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC) killthepixelnow (talk)
 * Note: User already voted "keep all" above. Striking through second vote. --<i style="font-family:'Rock salt','Comic Sans MS'; color: Green;">Tyw7</i> (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)


 * 220 listeners a month on Spotify that you have just confirmed. Nobody is listening to them!! Facebook is not a valid reference. Its non-RS. A lot of these references are very low-quality. For a band to be on Wikipedia, it must have extensive coverage and it must be something that people are actually listening to. I don't see any evidence and do I lot of these bands.  scope_creep Talk  07:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: The goal here is to determine, with valid criteria, if the article is relevant. You have not supported evidence to counter the sources herein presented.
 * In regard to WP:SIGCOV:
 * "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
 * El Comercio is the major newspaper in Peru. The oldest as well. Their second album was reviewed in their digital version
 * "Reliable" means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
 * Some of the publications that were listed are notable, such as a review in Decibel Magazine . I mean, not every metal band in the world have received a critique of their album in there. Being able to take part of a compilation album in Metal Metal Hammer Magazine means they made the cut, and were included by their music value.
 * "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent.
 * All interviews and album reviews are independent. In the original article, all sources to the band's website and social media were removed. And all the rest were done by independent publishers. Necromance Magazine is a Spanish magazine that covered two albums of the band and did an interview them that past month. The name of the band is even in the cover.
 * "Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article.
 * A band with fourteen years of trajectory, that has toured with bands such as Suffocation, Malevolent Creation, Venom Inc., Pestilence, and Vomitory, not to mention a whole lot of local concerts is relevant.
 * In regard to WP:BAND:
 * ==Criteria for musicians and ensembles==
 * Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria.
 * Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself. Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopedia article. The published works must be someone else writing about the musician, ensemble, composer, or lyricist, or their works.
 * The article deals with a band that fulfills at least that first criterion, for they were covered by multiple, non-trivial, published works as it was demonstrated. Just take a look at all the coverage they received with their last album.
 * As a closure, the sources presented have been thoroughly documented. Killthepixelnow (talk) 16:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Best (talk)
 * As a closure, the sources presented have been thoroughly documented. Killthepixelnow (talk) 16:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Best (talk)
 * As a closure, the sources presented have been thoroughly documented. Killthepixelnow (talk) 16:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Best (talk)


 * Comment: To the closing admin, note: User:Killthepixelnow had voted multiple times "keep all" when they meant as comment. --<i style="font-family:'Rock salt','Comic Sans MS'; color: Green;">Tyw7</i> (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: I had voted just once. The rest are comments, rightKillthepixelnow (talk) 16:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC).
 * , well you commented "keep all" two times. Just notifying the closing admin of this. --<i style="font-family:'Rock salt','Comic Sans MS'; color: Green;">Tyw7</i> (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 19:09, 1 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.