Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eleventyseven


 * 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. --Core desat 01:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Eleventyseven

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article has been speedy deleted 5 times under CSD A7/no assertion of notability. Couldn't find any WP:RS in Google results to indicate that this band passes WP:MUSIC. Leuko 04:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing in Google to indicate this band could pass WP:MUSIC.  Nothing in Google even approaching a reliable source for its associated charity.  With five A7 speedies already under its belt, I'd also suggest considering salting lest this try for five G4 speedies next. Serpent&#39;s Choice 09:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: They never used to be notable enough for inclusion, and they aren't now. That charity sounds very suspect, too. J Milburn 10:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Since this has been created and deleted 5 times, and since this is no more notable than its predecessors, definitely delete. Virtual Cowboy 12:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unable to find anything in the article or elsewhere that meets the WP:BAND guideline. Gimmetrow 14:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: This band has been deleted before under CSD A7, but most of the times the real reason for deletion was plagiarized content. They are a rising band with a very popular debut album. I'm planning on reworking the article soon so please don't delete it. freeradster (talk | contribs) 02:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete but do not salt -- notability can change quickly in the field of music, and we don't want to hinder creation of an article should the band become notable. JulesH 14:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol delete vote.svg|20px]] Strong delete nomination says it all Will (is it can be time for messages now plz?) 18:15, 1 May 2007 (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.