Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dubsidia


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:01, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Dubsidia

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Not notable, no refs, fails musicbio, IP removing CSD tags GregJackP   Boomer!   01:01, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete - As it fails the notability guidelines for bands. I retagged it as a Speedy in the hopes that it will be deleted before the IP can remove the tag again.  Rorshacma (talk) 04:42, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, but not speedily. There are claims of releases on important labels (although I couldn't verify this) and working with major artists here, so I don't feel speedy deletion is appropriate. I couldn't find anything to convince me that they are yet notable enough for an article, however, so delete as not yet sufficiently notable.--Michig (talk) 07:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)


 * (It was me who declined the speedy deletion.) There is evidence that Moby admires them so it is not inconceivable that he is collaborating with them. But a search through Google News and in a library database of newspaper and magazine articles has not turned up any reliable sources that would help me to argue for WP:GNG notability, so I am left recommending delete in the absence of sources.  Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 02:44, 8 August 2012 (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.