Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centaurus-A (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. The sources dug up do not seem to meet the reliable source standards. NW ( Talk ) 03:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Centaurus-A (Band)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

NN band.  TheWeak   Willed   (T * G)  13:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, passes WP:MUSIC for the interview, album review, another album review, here, and here.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 00:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure if and album review because they both seem to be user submitted.  A while back (2004) Metal Crypt posted on the website that it was looking for reviewers .  As for the UG one, it has a username at the bottom of it, but I'm not 100% sure if or not it could be used.   TheWeak   Willed   (T * G)  20:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm, wasn't aware of that about Metal Crypt, very interesting read.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 23:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I went over some of my recent edits where I'd used Metal Crypt as a ref, and it seems the text may or may not written by a staff writer, the star votes are definitely user ratings. Didn't see that. Bugger!!!   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 01:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, no sources other than band's own website and myspace. Eeekster (talk) 04:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * What about the 5 I just posted above?   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 05:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete the effort to dig up WP:RS is admirable, but they fall below our standard as simple and marginal fansites (Check the alexa stats for metalcrypt, for example). That does not constitute reliable coverage to demonstrate this passes our standard at WP:BAND. Eusebeus (talk) 20:20, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just as a quick pointer, Alexa ranking isn't 100% accurate, as I have a website who's Alexa rank is in the low 400,000's, and I could name quite a few websites that get higher traffic, and their rank is in the 1,000,000's.  Just FYI.   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 20:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * That's true, but for our purposes of establishing notability for websites (and by extension their value as a source) at WP:WEB, Alexa is ok. Eusebeus (talk) 21:24, 13 September 2009 (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.