Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Arthur Krause


 * 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. Notability not sufficiently established. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 22:53, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Dr Arthur Krause

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

Contested prod - no indication of Notability and no Sources added that could establish it Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 14:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  —-- Avant-garde a clue - hexa  Chord 2  09:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of the text in this article was lifeted from the bands press releases and/or web site. Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 20:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, fails WP:BAND. No reliable sources.Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:49, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not meet notability guidelines. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.drarthurkrause.com/reviews.html lists a lot of reviews. Some are from sources that don't count as reliable, others, I don't know. If there is enough verifiable reliable reviews there they pass wp:music. I don't know Swedish, French, Polish, Italian or German well enough to properly judge most of the reviews/sources but it does to me suggest it may be a keep. Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:36, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Linking to the band's website doesn't prove notability. If the website has links to other sites which are notable, that's a different matter; link to those sites, but not to the band's.  Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Linking to the band's website doesn't prove notability. I never said it did. Yes it may have been better if I copied and pasted all  the links but that does not change that fact that the links exist. It is those links and reviews that may show notability.
 * For convenience, those with direct links, issue number or publication date: BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed FTM www.gothicrock.ru in Russia, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Martin Borg for CLOSE - UP #666 in Sweden, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Nochturnalhall in Germany,, RARE FLOWERS reviewed by Urotsukidoji's Pad in Canada, RARE FLOWERS reviewes by Daniel Claeson, GP (Gothenburg newspaper) Sweden (October 26th 2002).
 * With possibly dead direct links: BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Gothic Online in Germany, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Shadowshire in Germany
 * Linking only to sites home page (may lack Verifiability) (all these have dates so if they are refering to paper publications their verifiability is more likely): BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Beautevil for Gothtronic in Netherland, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by M.K for Obliveon in Germany, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Alternativepop in Poland, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Stillborn Webzine in Italy, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Obskure in France, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Mike Ventarola Hiddensanctuary, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Astan Magazin in Germany, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Metica in Sweden, BEFORE AND AFTER reviewed by Musicnonstop in UK, RARE FLOWERS reviewed by Gothic Online in Germany.
 * I have made a change to my original statement Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:39, 18 May 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.