Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C-Real (band) (2nd nomination)


 * 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. For the record, the person recreating the article was informed of both this discussion and the incubated article some time ago. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:23, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

C-Real (band)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Re-creation of a page incubated on 11 December 2011. This version has much less content and fewer refs than the deleted version. No new claims to notability and fails WP:BAND  Velella  Velella Talk 10:16, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 18 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - can't this article be speedily deleted using reason A10? Personally I was unaware until now that articles can be incubated and I expect the author of this duplicate is also ignorant of the incubation procedure. They could be pointed towards the incubated article and asked to expand it. Sionk (talk) 17:27, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 02:01, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Delete or userfy. Article creator is a new WP editor and should be directed to improve the existing, incubated article here--> WP:Article_Incubator/C-Real_(band). This article was just incubated for lack of notability. If and when substantial existing or future evidence of notability is added, this article should be promoted back to the main namespace. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 02:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - At this point, more refs seem to have been added, but the vast majority of them support only the same couple of statements. The incubated article does seem more in-depth, and I would think that this page still qualifies for speedy deletion (criterion A10), as pointed out by Sionk. If speedily deleted, the creator should be informed of the incubated version. Chris the Paleontologist  (talk &#124; contribs) 16:14, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 01:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Is it not possible for an editor to delete the article, as per general consensus above, and notify the author of the incubated article? Sionk (talk) 14:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - The author hasn't been active since December 17 but the original author of the incubated version is. Notify the original author. Jae ₩on ( Deposit ) 17:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable, allow the incubated article to bake. --Ifnord (talk) 15:07, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete A recently created article that duplicates an existing topic should have been criteria for WP:SPEEDY. Stubbleboy 17:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Userfy, per WP:DONTBITE. -- Trevj (talk) 10:50, 16 January 2012 (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.