Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/El Rod


 * 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. Can be restored as soon as there are sufficient reliable sources.  Sandstein  11:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

El Rod

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Nice looking article, lean on content. Artist does not appear to meet any of the criteria set in WP:MUS. References are not from reliable sources, consisting of blog entries etc.  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  17:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are no reliable sources cited in the article and I couldn't find any.--Michig (talk) 18:30, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable musician. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 22:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete A shame because it's nicely formatted and well written, but there are no reliable sources (and I couldn't find anything separately), and no indication of notability. Fails WP:MUSIC. ✤ Fosse 8 ✤ talk 11:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

This article shouldn't be deleted. It's a growing article on an indie artist from Europe. He is going on tour in May and considering coverage on the internet the sources will grow. Granted, there are some blog entries placed as sources, but there are also regular links with verifiable information. If the blog entries are such an issue, they can always be deleted by whomever has a problem with it.

The deletion tag can be removed and the page should be checked from time to time to view it's growth in content and sources. If that doesn't occur and the artist and the editors (including myself) have no reason to edit, then the page can be removed. I think that's a fair deal for such a short, neat article PaulBarner (talk) 16:14, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:BALL  Catfish  Jim  and the soapdish  18:55, 4 April 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.