Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domination Through Impurity


 * 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 of the debate was consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 15:59, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Domination Through Impurity
Garden-variety band vanity. 66.191.124.236 05:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Band vanity. No claim of notability. Herostratus 08:19, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - I was going to vote delete because they haven't been published, but they meet WP:WEB quite happily due to media coverage. . I would suggest that in cases like this WP:MUSIC, which states that a band has to be published, shouldn't be used, as they seem to be notable enough as a live band.  This is a similar case to Fugazi and You Am I, 2 extremely well known live bands that were known as live bands for 10 years before releasing their first albums (Fugazi never released an album AFAIK).  You Am I eventually had number 1 hits.  The reality is that some bands don't want to make a studio album and only ever play live.  Many examples of this kind of thing.  There's ABBA impersonators that are extremely notable that get 50,000 people at their gigs, yet never release anything. Zordrac 19:54, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Unrelated to the article, but Fugazi hella released albums. :) Peachlette 04:04, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Wrong Fugazi. The one I am referring to never released an album after 15 years on the national circuit (or a single, either).  Wrote over 50 songs though and played to crowds of 50,000+ Zordrac  (talk) Wishy Washy  Darwikinian Eventualist 17:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 2 notes to my comments - 1) Apparently Fugazi doesn't have their own page (hmph, they should!) 2) Apparently this band does have published albums so may meet WP:MUSIC anyway. Zordrac 19:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - how exactly does this article have anything to do with WP:WEB? That would only apply if the URL was the entry.  Sadly, even the link you provided does not confirm any of the three WP:WEB suggestions HackJandy 22:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Erm, reviewed in the media? Sheesh. Obvious as you're gonna get. Zordrac 22:56, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I see blogs and I see webzines, but I don't see any attention from the mainstream media. Unfortunately we don't generally count web mentions as establishing notability of a band, except in certain cases like Allmusic. And this band doesn't appear on Allmusic. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 23:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Also, text is lifted, complete with misspelling of "intense", verbatim from the band's website. rodii 21:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - possibly speedy. Copyvio, does not fullfill WP:MUSIC, has not been published, no AM, WP is not a crystal ball.. HackJandy 22:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. NN. 292 Google hits, and I only see one CD released (Unmatched Brutality, published by Comatose Music). Doesn't meet WP:MUSIC --  Dalbury ( Talk )  23:21, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for the various reasons given above and summarised by HackJandy. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 23:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - band has a record produced on a label, tours and plays various festivals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.190.104.160 (talk • contribs)
 * The above contributor is the originator (I won't say "author") of the article, which, as mentioned above, is copy'n'pasted from the band's website. I have no argument about the band's notability, but the article could document which label, which festivals, etc. As it stands, though, it's a copyright violation, it's not wikified, and it has no sourcing of any kind except for the band's website. It's gotta be better than that. rodii 02:07, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment. I can't vote again, but may I say, if band has a record produced on a label, tours and plays various festivals then WHY DOESN'T THE ARTICLE SAY SO??? WHAT LABEL, WHAT TOURS, WHAT FESTIVALS? Even if it IS true, I'm basically at the point where, if a band is too freaken lazy to make their OWN case for notability, why should I have to slog through the web to find it?  I say: even if a band is notable, if they don't make the claim in the article, the hell with them.Herostratus 08:45, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment. the band did not write this article. I am a fan of the band, and I was merely adding a side project for one of the members from the Nile page, and I decided to add information for it. I took the bio from their website and didn't change anything because I didn't realize 10 people would see it over night before I had time to learn how to properly use wikipedia and edit and add to the content. also this is from WP:MUSIC "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise extremely notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such." From this, DTI is allowed to be posted here because Joe Payne from Nile is in this band. (Cyrock)
 * Comment 's first edit was about 15 hours after this article was nominated for deletion, so if he started it, it was under a different user name. Oh, that would be --  Dalbury ( Talk )  01:40, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I was the original person to post the information, then someone else kindly first edited it so it was not in copyright violation. Either way, It does not change the fact that this article is allowed to be posted under WP:MUSIC for the reason I have previously stated. (Cyrock)
 * Comment Allmusic.com is rather cryptic about Joe Payne; his genre is rock, and absolutely no other information. I get 262 Google hits for "Joe Payne" + Nile. I don't think that makes him "extremely notable". --  Dalbury ( Talk )  02:05, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Has nothing to do with him. The Guideline says "member was in a BAND that is extremely notable. Nile is one of the most known death metal bands other than Cannibal Corpse. Thus, according to my previous statement, this article is allowed. Also allmusic is not very up to date and correct. They list Nile as Rock, when they are Death Metal, and do not mention their latest album which came out 8 months ago. (Cyrock)
 * Comment. You forgot to quote the rest of the line from WP:MUSIC, "note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such." Right now it looks like Joe Payne's notability comes from recently joining a notable band, and I don't see that notability rubbing off on Domination Through Impurity. When Joe Payne gets his own article, then there can be a Redirect from Domination Through Impurity to his article. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  02:29, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Open your eyes. You forgot to read. I quoted the ENTIRE thing in my original post on it. Stop trying to make things up to further your own arguement. Also until it clearly says an Artist needs to be "extremely notable" before joining an "extremely noteable" band, this article is clearly able to be posted. It only says the BAND of which the artist is in has to be. Also your personal opinion on Nile "rubbing off" on DTI has ZERO credibility. Your personal opinion is not fact. I can just as easily say it will "rub off". (Cyrock)
 * Comment. Cyrock, sorry, I didn't mean to pile on you like that. I was getting a little frustrated after seeing a bunch of really poor band articles.  The D through I article is improved, by the way, good work and congrats. It must suck to have a bumch of people piling on you when you're just starting out.  Sorry, and welcome to Wikipedia!  Unfortunately getting caught up in a deletion argument is probably the worst way to start out!  There's a lot of fuzzy warm goodness here too, so don't get scared off! Herostratus 08:41, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. FCYTravis 19:21, 3 December 2005 (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.