Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canvas Solaris


 * 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  19:09, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Canvas Solaris

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NBAND. Article currently cites no reliable sources and I can't find anything on them past a blog entry on prog-sphere and a band listing on sputnikmusic. The articles for their albums should probably go too. Cannolis (talk) 21:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - what's considered a reliable source in this subject area? I found in-depth coverage at prog-sphere.com and metalinside.de but both look like blogs. Yes! Weekly might be more reliable but doesn't seem very broadly published. They're mentioned as an influential contributor to the instrumental metal genre in this book source. I'm leaning keep on the balance and depth of coverage and variety of sources, but will wait for opinions from editors more familiar with this topic. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:49, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:22, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:37, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete as my searches found no better links than a few blogs such as at Blogspot and there's simply no signs of improvement. SwisterTwister   talk  06:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 00:55, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:41, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 03:02, 29 September 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: 3rd relist because the last comment needs more discussion. Courcelles (talk) 20:06, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per failure of WP:NBAND and lack of reliable sources. --Rubbish computer 22:35, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep not only do they have a page or so in Wagner's book Mean Deviation: Four Decades of Progressive Heavy Metal, in the Italian Guida al Nuovo Progressive Rock 1990-2008 it says Nell'ambito del metal strumentale ben di meglio hanno prodotto i Canvas Solaris, usando sempre l'arma della prodezza virtuosistica, applicata però ad una concezione estrema di math rock fin troppo tecnica e glaciale. and goes on for over a page. That is substantial and way more recognition than most bands get. --Bejnar (talk) 21:14, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 20:06, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - If Bejnar's sources are reliable (I cannot judge them, having never heard of them), and if those citations (including page #'s) were inserted into the article, it most would pass the notability guideline.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - nobody has responded to my comment about what is considered a reliable source so I'm going by GNG, and Bejnar's source is compelling, along with the others I mentioned. It's clearly not a well-published genre, so any significant mentions are likely to indicate notability insomuch as anything in this genre gets to the notability threshold. I'll also be disappointed in the bureaucracy if this doesn't get relisted two more times, at least. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:16, 14 October 2015 (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.