Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chew lips


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 00:02, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Chew lips

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

Non-notable, self-promotional band article.  MBisanz  talk 05:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  05:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I've already justified the creation of this page twice before. It was speedily deleted, then recreated, then marked again for speedy deletion, but was then accepted after I provided proof that the entry merits inclusion as it satisfies WP:MUSIC rule #1 - subject of multiple non-trivial published work - See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chew_lips for references. Also, I refute that there is anything self-promotional about this article; I have no connection to the band. bbc_richardb (talk) 12:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep Needs work but thats no reason to delete on notability grounds. Google search gives articles by the BBC, the NME, and on the next page, The Times. Notable in my book Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep.  BBC coverage seems to establish notability.  --Clay Collier (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Notability seems reasonably well established. Although the band is new and has only released the one album, it seems to be with a major label and they have attracted a fair amount of media attention.  --TeaDrinker (talk) 18:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - I made an error tagging it with A7 (I removed it shortly after), but I do believe this meets the notability criteria. &lowast; \ / (⁂) 06:27, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Group has no listing on Allmusic.com, and they include just about everybody. Just one non-charting single release is not enough to satisfy the minimum criteria of WP:CREATIVE. Untick (talk) 04:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment allmusic isn't the be-all-and-end-all though - if there's plenty of other good sources it should stay in. Equally, if allmusic was the only source the article probably shouldnt. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 05:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep and move to Chew Lips. Notability established via the reliable sources on the talk page, meaning WP:MUSIC is met. sparkl!sm hey! 20:04, 4 April 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.