Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concrete Sox


 * 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. There is consensus that there is sufficient coverage in the belowmentioned books to meet the threshold of the General Notability Guideline. (non-admin closure) Jack Frost (talk) 11:56, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Concrete Sox

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable band! GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:28, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

British crust punk band. The article was created back in 2006 by a user who is not a SPA, but the article has been edited by the users "Concrete Sox" and "Vic sox croll" who are. The former user's name is shared with the band, and the latter's name is shared with the founder/singer's name, so the COI is obvious. Concrete Sox is also blocked as of now, for spamming. Vic sox croll isn't, but his edits revolve around this page as well. Anyways, there are no reliable sources presented, and I couldn't find anything that indicates notability. Youtube, metal archives, discogs, spirit of metal, blogs and retail sites are still not reliable and they never will be. And I couldn't find anything else besides these. I have noticed that Concrete Sox has a following in the underground, but there are no reliable sources available that a Wikipedia article could be built on. The German article is equally poor in terms of sourcing (at least there are a book cited), and the Hungarian one also relies on blogs as sources. No evidence of notable members and labels. Maybe there are print sources available, since this was a pre-Internet band. But during a Google search I couldn't find anything that establishes notability. Btw, I have an (awesome) book called "Choosing Death: The Improbable History of Death Metal and Grindcore", and it mentions Concrete Sox, unfortunately, they only appear as a mention in a small list of other crust punk bands and on a concert poster. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not really notable in the context of a general encyclopaedia.  They would have a place on a specialist Fandom site, certainly.  RobinCarmody (talk) 18:10, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Concrete Sox have 8 pages devoted to them in Ian Glasper's book Trapped in a Scene: UK Hardcore 1985–1989, and also shorter coverage in a couple of other books. They were a significant and influential band in the UK crust/grindcore scene of the 80s/early 90s, an era from which it can be hard to find coverage online (it will certainly exist in print sources from that era). Their albums have been released by labels in multiple countries, including Germany, Japan and Malaysia.--Michig (talk) 15:48, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The eight-page coverage sounds awesome, can you please post it here? About them being influential, I know that since I am familiar with the band, I just haven't found anything reliable during a google search. But that's why I said "maybe there are print sources available since this was a pre-Internet band". GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 11:48, 27 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Since we are talking about books, they occupy p. 332-338 in Alexandros Anesiadis' book Crossover the Edge. Obviously, book contents can't be posted here. Geschichte (talk) 20:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I didn't mean to paste the whole eight-page coverage here, just the link of the book. But as I see, they have been covered by other books as well, so leaning towards keep now. 15:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   22:31, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep as has substantial coverage in reliable book sources as described in this discussion so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think the two sources found above put it over the GNG threshhold, the amount of other books about that era of music which contain information on the band make it appear notable. I know that last is a "sources must exist" argument, and if that was the only argument, without the 2 solid sources, I'd probably !vote the other way.  Onel 5969  TT me 00:25, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - They seem to just pass GNG. Foxnpichu (talk) 12:43, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - the book sources provided are reliable and satisfy WP:N criteria. I could probably fairly easily find more sources but I think the Glasper and Anesiadis books are easily enough. Needs properly referencing in the article, obviously. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 11:15, 9 January 2021 (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.