Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cord (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   keep (non-admin closure). The album article can be re-nominated separately if necessary. snigbrook (talk) 19:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Cord (band)

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

non-notable band, fails all WP:MUSIC criteria. neon white talk 14:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Adding non notable album by the artist


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  KuyaBriBri Talk 14:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  KuyaBriBri Talk 14:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Two chart singles in the UK. Sources are hard to find, but it doesn't mean they ain't there. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 15:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Neither is verified. Both are very dubious claims for a band with near to zero publicity. --neon white talk 16:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I found reference to charting in an article about the album. Not quite the same as a direct reference, but there are probably more out there. If only that hadn't picked such a stupid one word name. Stuartpgardner (talk) 19:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. There are multiple articles on BBC Norfolk about them, I added two when I removed the prod. As TPH says, they had two charting singles, and they were signed to a major indie label. Fences  &amp;  Windows  16:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Very insignificant local coverage really isnt enough
 * Their MySpace blog refers to there being other press - much of it bad! - and they posted a clipping from RockSound:. There is coverage out there, but it's hard to find online. Ah, here we go: an interview with MTV: Fences  &amp;  Windows  18:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * A Birmingham Mail article:. Eastern Daily Press:. Norwich Evening News:, GigWise:. Fences  &amp;  Windows  20:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's still very minor local coverage. --neon white talk 12:09, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * MTV isn't local. Birmingham is not local to Norwich. Anyway, this "local coverage doesn't count" rule is made up. Fences  &amp;  Windows  20:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep source for charting . Yes I know some dislike acharts but from my understanding it is 'cause they also keep bad charts. I have never seen any questioning of their UK charts (and some others). Please correct me if I'm wrong, I've used their Australian chart archives Duffbeerforme (talk) 16:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The source is not known for reliability. I'd dismiss it altogether. The Official UK Charts Company is the only provider of UK chart info and they are well known for not passing it around so it's very likely that acharts sources from unreliable source and possibly wikipedia itself.. --neon white talk 16:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Another source for the charting:, and this review confirms #34 for Winter, and The Sun "Single of the Week".. It was 3 July 2006:. The song Sea of Trouble was on the album NME Essential Bands 2006:. Fences  &amp;  Windows  19:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Being on a compilation CD is not a criteria for notability, http://www.polyhex.com and inthenews.co.uk are not reliable sources. --neon white talk 12:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Clipping of review of Sea of Trouble in NME:. Fences  &amp;  Windows  20:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Photobucket is not a reliable source. --neon white talk 12:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How petty. Fences  &amp;  Windows  said it was an NME review. For those who know what NME reviews are like, it's clear a clipping of an NME review. The fact it's being hosted on photobucket, does not mean it was not in NME, it says the very opposite - it is an image which proves they were reviewed by the NME. Stuartpgardner (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Look, the band's MySpace blog clearly has them celebrating getting to #34 with Winter on 3 July 2006, and self-published sources can be considered reliable when they're about themselves. They refer to getting a bad review in NME for the album, which I'm not finding on the NME site. It was by Dan Martin in late Sept 2006. Fences  &amp;  Windows  20:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Do I really need to sort through my copies of NME to find the issue in question? The other sources are conclusive enough for me, but if it really requires me to go through back issues of NME to find a three star review in a national music magazine to prove it's not just local coverage (how is Birmingham or Devon 'local' to Norwich? How does being on the soundtrack to a game sold to a US market, not prove that they were more than a 'local' band?), then I shall do it. Stuartpgardner (talk) 22:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect the album, no individal notability shown. Duffbeerforme (talk) 16:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I personally don't rate the band, but I recall publicity about them around the time of their album; and I live in Devon, so it wasn't just local coverage. Stuartpgardner (talk) 19:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I just watched their videos on MTV.co.uk; ugh, how tedious. I am not arguing for keep because I like their music! Fences  &amp;  Windows  19:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't suggest anyone would argue for keeping them based on whether they like them (did anyone like them?) or not. Notability is the key and they scrape through on their chart placing and coverage, at least. Stuartpgardner (talk) 21:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Minor local coverage maybe but charting is unverified. I'd like to see more coverage than promo articles in local papers. --neon white talk 12:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Lucky you've been shown coverage from the NME and MTV then. 86.44.25.57 (talk) 03:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep: 2 charting singles and album review in The Guardian. --JD554 (talk) 07:10, 24 June 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.