Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corpus Delicti (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. Sr13 04:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Corpus Delicti (band)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No assertion of notability and completely unreferenced article. As it stands now, fails WP:BAND/WP:MUSIC /Blaxthos 17:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per nom. Not notable.--Bryson 18:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - doesn't fail WP:BAND as per point 5 - two of their albums were released on Cleopatra Records. Lugnuts 19:02, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Also note that there are album articles that should similarly be grouped in this discussion. fuzzy510 19:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment but how can you say it's a non-notable group when it clearly meets the crietira on the WP:BAND page. And I quote: A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, hip hop crew, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:  Then check item 5.  Maybe the nominator would like to refresh themselves on this criteria. Lugnuts 19:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Because if you continued further on that same criteria, you'd see that it clearly stated that two or more albums needed to be released on a major label or one of the more important independents. Cleopatra Records is certainly not a major label, and I'm not willing to call a label which is apparently mostly known for its compilation releases a more important independent label.  With that judgment, by no means does the band in question clearly meet WP:BAND.  --fuzzy510 19:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * And this is were Wikipedia becomes a victim of it's own policy on Weasel words! As Cleopatra has an article on WP, it makes it important by default.  It's been going for "more than a few years" (again, a weasel statement) and has a roster of notable performers (under the Market dominance heading).  Again, these performers are notable, as they too have articles on WP. Lugnuts 19:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * While Cleo's star has definitely fallen over the years (too many stupid comps), they have published a large proportion of the Gothic scene's major artists and I'd say that having had full albums released by them is a good pointer towards importance in the scene/genre. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 22:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * And if you read the description it gives as to what constitutes a more important independant label, you will notice that it defines it as "an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable", so here we have a label with a history dating back 15 years, and having signed Gary Numan, Electric Hellfire Club, Switchblade Symphony, Leæther Strip, X Marks the Pedwalk, Mephisto Walz, Kill Switch...Klick, Information Society, Heaven 17, Download, Noise Box, and Razed In Black. I hope I've made my point. - Zeibura (Talk) 22:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak keep per the fact that they've had two albums on Cleopatra Records. I would think that the label is marginally notable enough (not just because they have a Wikipedia article). Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 20:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - TenPoundHammer expresses a good point; the band has released two records on a semi-notable record label. NSR 77  T C  20:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Nominator is perfectly familiar with WP:BAND. ;-)  As noted by Fuzzy, I wouldn't go so far as to call Cleopatra a major label.  The criteria is major label or a important independant label.  This fails BOTH criteria (major label, or an important independant label).  I will conceed, however, that this is dependant upon if you view Cleopatra Records as an important indie label or not.  Cover compilations don't cut it, IMHO, but that's why we have AFD debates.  :-) /Blaxthos 21:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That was the first time I've actually read WP:BAND and I was quiet interested with what's in the criteria! Point 12 however, is a complete joke! Lugnuts 05:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Read the criterion. It clearly gives a description as to what constitutes an important independant label. - Zeibura (Talk) 22:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Notable band in the Goth scene. In the context of the Gothic genre, Cleopatra is a major label and having full-length albums released by them definitely counts.  I wouldn't count necessarily being featured on Cleo compilations as being enough, but full-length albums, definitely. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 22:01, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 06:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, passes criterion 5 of WP:MUSIC by having 2 compilations (including a best of album) released on Cleopatra. - Zeibura (Talk) 22:22, 27 June 2007 (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.