Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Distributor (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. Cirt (talk) 10:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Distributor (band)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

fails WP:MUSIC. While it does have third-party coverage, such sources are unreliable. Ironholds (talk) 19:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The text was written by me for their site so i hold the copyright. What other sources/references are needed?Stroopy (talk) 14:01, 11 October 2009
 * Delete - There is no coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Note that the bulk of teh article content was lifted off the band's Myspace page and has been removed as a copyright violation. -- Whpq (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Stroopy. Do you understand that by contributing text to Wikipedia you thereby license it to the public for reuse under CC-BY-SA and GFDL. Ie. you no longer have the copyright you are thinking you had. Copyrights. If you want the text you wrote to be spread further then good. otherwise? Duffbeerforme (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Err, no, Stroopy still holds the copyright - it isn't magically now held by WMF. Stroopy has just licensed the WMF to use it under certain circumstances. In any case this is irrelevant and not part of the real issue - there is no question of copyright here, only notability. Ironholds (talk) 17:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears what I tried to say differs from what I actually said. Ironholds comment expands on what I was trying to say (a change, not a loss). It also brings us back to the important point in this afd. notability. Duffbeerforme (talk) 18:11, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Copyright is not and has never been the issue. We have a standard of notability or importance which bands have to live up to. This is primarily done by looking at sources; the full notability guideline for bands can be found by looking at WP:MUSIC. The primary claim of notability, although not the only one, is that the band or musician "Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable". There doesn't seem to be this sort of coverage for Distributor. Ironholds (talk) 19:16, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * drop-d.ie is a very prominant and popular irish music review site and i think their review of distributor's album is noteworthy. metal-temple.com is also a popular metal music review and news website. Their are currently more critics who have requested a copy of the album to review and the band is also set to appear on Ireland's national tv station, RTÉ One in Spring. Stroopy (talk) 23:12, 12 October 2009
 * Neither are reliable, though. If and when Distributor appear on Irish TV, then we can include them (assuming that it passes WP:MUSIC) but we do not keep articles based on potential future notability. Ironholds (talk) 22:28, 12 October 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.