Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead Season (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   delete. kelapstick(bainuu) 11:56, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Dead Season (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject seems to not meet WP:MUSICBIO. The references provided are mostly from the same page – Tumblr. Karlhard (talk) 20:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

The article features many references to other Wikipedia articles, which are relevant to the article, and also to Wikipedia as well (keeping readers on the site after reading this one). I also took the time to give as many external references as possible, which I agree are mostly from the same sources, Tumblr, Bandcamp, AbridgedPause. But this is because only since last month has Dead Season started to be documented and archived on the internet, therefore all the sources are recent and contained, they have not had the chance to spread about just yet. I spent 6 months researching and writing this article for Dead Season, and it would break my heart if it would get deleted this fast from Wikipedia.

Can you please give me tips on what I could do to assure that this will not be deleted? Do I need to provide more sources, or more different sources? Have I not given the correct licence for the picture? Please keep me informed on anything that I could do to make this article stay on Wikipedia.Thank you. Alexandre Julien, User:HDS
 * What you need, but haven't provided, is reliable source coverage. Which means things like newspapers, major music magazines, CBC Radio, etc., where a professional media service not personally invested in the band's career has chosen to give them coverage — it does not include Tumblr or Bandcamp or Vimeo clips or a blog where you're crediting yourself as the blogger. (Not that anybody's personal blog ever counts as sourcing on Wikipedia, but it's an especially problematic conflict of interest violation if you're the author of both the Wikipedia article and the sources it's being "referenced" to.) Bearcat (talk) 07:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The article is well detailed, but no sources to meet basic notability guidelines or music notability guidelines. Make sure to safe the sources, and when the subject becomes more notable, in case of deleted, can be rewritten with a similar context. Karlhard (talk) 18:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Overly detailed but poorly sourced (fails WP:RS due to overuse of social media) promo biography. The Banner talk 22:50, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, it may be a case of COI. Wikipedia is not a promotional page. Karlhard (talk) 18:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  23:30, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 02:23, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm not seeing a shred of reliable source coverage here, and I'm not sure I'm even seeing a claim of notability that would actually pass WP:NMUSIC even if it were sourced. Unfortunately, if the word about the band "has not had the chance to spread about just yet", then Wikipedia isn't the place to help spread it. You have to wait until they garner real media coverage in properly reliable sources, and then come back and write an article that uses that media coverage for sourcing. You don't get to use Wikipedia as a promotional venue to help create the media profile of a band that hasn't already garnered enough media coverage for our article to be properly verifiable — our role here is to follow the media coverage, not to lead it. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 07:53, 2 October 2014 (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.