Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blanket Music


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Baseball   Watcher  22:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Blanket Music

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No evidence of notability and no reliable sources. » Swpbτ • ¢ 18:43, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  » Swpbτ • ¢ 18:48, 13 May 2011 (UTC)  Apparently it hasn't, but I've included it in a more approriate list - see below.--Michig (talk) 19:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. When I removed Swpb's invalid second PROD from this before leaving for work this morning, I advised that anyone wishing to take it to AFD should (per WP:BEFORE) search Google first. Sadly, this does not appear to have happened. If it had, they might have found these:, , , , , , , , , , . Clearly notable.--Michig (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  —Michig (talk) 19:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I've referenced their Allmusic biography into the article; that and the substantial reviews located by Michig demonstrate notability. AllyD (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: Nothing came up in a 15 year Google news search, and only CMJ mentions turn up in Google books. While the sources listed by Michig (Allmusic, Pitchfork media, Tiny Mix Tapes, Pop Matters and The Portland Mercury) are all notable music publications, with the exception of the short Allmusic bio these are not feature articles about the band per ser. There is a mention of a song on a soundtrack, but the rest are music reviews. Also, the music reviews are in equal measure bad reviews. Whether or not notability can be established with a handful of music reviews--and mixed reviews at that--seems to be a gray area in WP:BAND.--Atlantictire (talk) 20:49, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't understand why you would think that music reviews would not be valid coverage of a musical group - bands play live and make records, so that's what people are likely to write about. They may not be in-depth features but they easily meet the requirements of being significant coverage. I also don't understand how favourable reviews would make a band more notable than unfavourable reviews - we don't have critical opinion as an inclusion criterion.--Michig (talk) 20:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Because, if a band is truly notable then some publication will probably want to eventually profile them. A band that gets a few tepid reviews from Pitchfork and Tiny Mix Tapes and then disappears off the face of the planet, never to be thought of again, in my mind is not notable.--Atlantictire (talk) 21:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep "A few tepid reviews" on some of the leading music websites in the western world are enough to satisfy WP:BAND.--sparkl!sm hey! 13:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are many reliable sources that can be found without too much difficulty. The band has been noticed and is therefore sufficiently notable. Also, when it comes to tepid or bad reviews, for purposes of this discussion there is no difference between positive notability and negative notability. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 16:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This isn't my concern so much as the fact that you can't write an article on this band... because no one has ever written an article on this band. If WP:BAND allows for the creation of articles on bands such Blanket Music then you're just going to have a giant database of mute facts with no historical context or biographical info. Maybe someday some notable publication will write an article on Blanket Music... but you can't go creating wikipedia articles on the future possibility of sources.


 * Anyway I realize my objection as it stands is WP: I DON'T LIKE IT, so I've suggested on the WP:BAND page that we consider refining notability standards.--Atlantictire (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – Notability of subject is established by reliable sources; detailed discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:03, 20 May 2011 (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.