Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Children 18:3


 * 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 per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure). Following the relisted discussion, clear consensus forms that independent sources in the article provide sufficient notability. WilliamH (talk) 21:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Children 18:3

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

Non-notable band which fails WP:MUSIC. Earlier PROD was removed without comment. DAJF (talk) 05:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomOo7565 (talk) 05:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Non-notability Parkerjl (talk) 05:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.   —DAJF (talk) 05:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:Notability (music). SWik78 (talk) 15:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep No I dont think we should delete this article. I think we should go and find websites that have more information about the band and their back round. we should work together on this.Rockismorethanmusic (talk) 12:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Band is not notable.Inhumer (talk) 05:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep This band is not non-notable, although the article's current state implies that they are. They have had music/magazine articles written about them from external sources; see WP:MUSIC notability guidelines. I may change my vote later, but I'll see what I can do with working on this article and adding refs. -- Jamie  S93  17:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I've somewhat expanded and improved the article, adding info and refs, including a claim of some kind of notability. What do you all think about it now? Let me know on here, if you don't mind (best to keep the discussion in one place). -- Jamie  S93  02:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fabrictramp (talk) 00:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC) (Article has changed substantially since last delete !vote. Relisting to allow review of expanded article.)


 * Keep Band is in top 30 of Christian rock per 3rd party reference at bottom of article; I'd say that makes them notable, at least in that genre. Plvekamp (talk) 01:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to scrape through by the multiple sources; one of which even asserts being among top in its genre. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep notable - needs expanding though. Fattyjwoods  ( Push my button  ) 03:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep appearance in multiple independent sources suggest notability. Needs expansion, not deletion.  Celarnor Talk to me  04:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The band is highly notable within its genre, and has the sources to show for it.  Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 18:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as expander. The article mentions their single making it onto a top-30 national chart in its genre, and cites several third-party refs with coverage of the subject. So at this point, I think the article provides sufficient reference to the band's notability. -- Jamie  S93  20:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources in the article. --Bardin (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2008 (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.