Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caramel (band)


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:57, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Caramel (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Semi-advertorialized article about a band, not reliably sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. As always, bands are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and instead must meet certain achievement-based criteria, and have a certain volume of reliable source coverage about them, for an article to become earned -- but the only notability claim in evidence here is that their debut album was released just a couple of months ago, and there's just one actual source being shown (the article was otherwise liberally tarted up with a lot of offsite links to primary sources, which I've already removed as WP:ELNO violations.) As always, no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when they have a stronger notability claim and better sourcing to support it, but nothing shown here is enough yet. Bearcat (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Agree with nom. I just now briefly worked on the article to clean it up. When I searched for content, it was very difficult because hits for the food kept coming up before the band. That tells me that even as "Caramel (band)" they're not as notable as the food as consumed by bands. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I have since included more references to articles. I understand what you are saying but many bands on here that are fairly well known have names that would pull up something else before you'd find them on a search engine. It would be a shame if this was deleted as I was planning to detail a lot more about this group. Forgive me as I am fairly new to all of this. Weeyam (talk) 22:35, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not what Walter Görlitz said; he said that even using "band" as a disambiguator to limit other things coming up in the search this band still got outhit by other things, which is not the same thing as "this band isn't the only thing that would ever come up in a Google search on its name at all". Very few bands would ever pass that latter test at all, because bands routinely name themselves after people and places and things and words. But that's got nothing to do with our notability criteria, at any rate — the notability test is not the uniqueness of the band's name, but the ability to find reliable sources that are covering the band in the context of one or more notable accomplishments.
 * Please familiarize yourself with our notability criteria for musicians, and with what constitutes a reliable and notability-supporting source. We do not guarantee a Wikipedia article to every band that exists on the planet, and we don't deem bands notable just because they've been covered in blogs — to get a Wikipedia article, a band has to (a) accomplish something that passes the notability criteria for musicians, and (b) receive coverage about that in real media. Bearcat (talk) 16:28, 13 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - WP:TOOSOON. I also struggled to find anything outside of the few sources y'all dug up. Missvain (talk) 18:07, 16 January 2020 (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.