Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Gigantic


 * 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. Nominator "putting this here for community input" more than anything else: input has been unanimously to keep. (non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Big Gigantic

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was csd-a7 deleted way back in the day, then recreated at much improved level, however I am not sure there is enough information to justify a notability claim. I'm putting this here for community input. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:57, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:13, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. This article still has some overly promotional text that needs pruning, but the band is certainly notable. A 2015 Billboard article describes them as "a rare sort of festival staple – equally at home playing ‘heads-only’ outings like Electric Forest, Shambhala, and Camp Bisco as mainstream festivals like Coachella, Lollapalooza, and Ultra Music Festival. They also remain hometown heroes in Colorado, where their annual Rowdytown concert series at the hallowed Red Rocks Amphitheatre – set to kick off this weekend from Sept. 25-26 – has sold out every year since its 2012 debut."   Other potential sources include . --Arxiloxos (talk) 18:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   11:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:42, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per Arxiloxos, the Billboard and Rolling Stone articles establish notability, and the New Times article can be used to flesh out the article even though it is local. --Cerebellum (talk) 14:39, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  14:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as they have been covered in multiple notable publications such as Billboard and Rolling Stone as stated above. This meets WP:BAND. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: Its has coverage in reliable sources including one from ABC news in my search results to meet GNG. KGirlTrucker81talk what I'm been doing 15:07, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Easily satisfies WP:GNG. This coverage wasn't hard to find:, , , , , , , , , , . --Michig (talk) 19:30, 5 August 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.