Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caligola (Secret Society)


 * 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   speedy delete.  DGG ( talk ) 17:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Caligola (Secret Society)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a contested speedy deletion. It appears not to be an actual secret society, but a high-context musical group, albeit not realy a notable one, from Sweden. I'm leaning towards deletion but would be open to keeping it if someone can find reliable sources and remove the spam. Please discuss. Bearian (talk) 21:35, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

http://www.musikexpress.de/das_heft/aktuelle_ausgabe/article119517/november-2011.html

http://powermetal.de/news/news-Neo-Crossover_von_CALIGOLA,28341.html

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=4067&artikel=4765494

Caligolaaa (talk) 23:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * None of these links are what wikipedia would consider to be reliable links about the band. They're either promotional in nature or the band is only briefly mentioned. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79


 * Speedy delete This article clearly meets CSD:A7 since it does not assert notability. Indeed it goes out of its way to assert its non-notability: "Due to that circumstance,members as well as secret rituals and places for ceremonial gatherings are hardly known". The comments on the article talk page contesting the speedy make matters worse, clearly demonstrating this is a hoax and the article is simply there to promote a new band. The only attempt at claim to notability is arguing for inherited notability since members of Caligola are apparently part of Mando Diao (though no evidence is given for this); WP:N is very clear that notability is not inheritable, so this is not a valid reason to keep the article. So we have a hoax, a non-notable band and an attempt to promote that band through a Wikipedia page, so at least A7, G11 and G3 apply. The sources just posted suggest the group was formed today and won't even release its first music until next year. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball Sparthorse (talk) 23:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete /\--- That. I couldn't have summarized it better, so won't try. I was leaning towards tagging A7 or hoax myself, but someone beat me to it with the A7 tagging. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 23:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete for all the reasons Sparthorse mentioned. I wasn't able to find any mention of this band anywhere on the internet other than their facebook page and the wiki entry. This looks to be a pretty blatant advertisement for the band.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:50, 27 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Speedy delete. Self-defeating article. By asserting that "members as well as secret rituals and places for ceremonial gatherings are hardly known", the article implies a lack of notability and/or a lack of reliable sources upon which the article could be based. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 17:14, 27 October 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.