Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elysium band


 * 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 speedily deleted. If it's been speedily deleted several times already, chances are that it isn't getting any more notable. Elkman (Elkspeak) 03:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Elysium band

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

Delete: Fails WP:RS and WP:MUSIC.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 00:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:CSD. Already tagged. -- On the  other side  Contribs 00:21, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources to establish notability, and doesn't make anything at WP:BAND.  --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 00:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy NN myspace band, no references. It has been speedied as Elysium (band)  and,  as Elysium (Band)  four  times already.— Ѕandahl  00:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Should this page be salted in all spellings? Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 00:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply Something with latent potential for notability (i.e, musical groups) should never be salted. Celarnor Talk to me 01:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: As much as I disagree with Celarnor's reasoning (heavy disruption warrants salting; it's easy to undue salting should they become notable), I'm not sure these should be salted. The editor really seems like he's making a misguided effort to create an article on the band and we're potentially biting the newbie without telling him what he's done wrong until we've bitten. I think he'll stop. If he doesn't, we can always go back and salt. Redfarmer (talk) 01:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In what way is it easy to undo salting? The editor in question has to put up a request to have it unsalted.  Newbies aren't going to do that, it's too complicated; they're simply going to say "Oh, apparently Wikipedia doesn't allow articles on this band" and go back to myspace. Celarnor Talk to me  01:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Remember what we tell people in warning templates regarding autobiographies? If it's notable, someone will write on it. That means there's going to be someone who is willing to take it to deletion review. Also, if we start excluding anything with the slightest possibility of becoming notable in the future, we're excluding almost everything except for nonsense titles (a.k.a. "Create a new page here". Salting becomes useless. Redfarmer (talk) 01:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I now have a new red link (like this one) to link to for no reason other than a lame attempt to be funny. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 01:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. First, thinking "Oh, it's okay; if we break this page so it can't be edited ever, someone will eventually challenge it in the proper place" is a bad assumption to make.  Secondly, bands are a somewhat special case, with relatively relaxed guidelines.  It's easy to become a notable band here.  All you have to do is get a few records out; they can be even under a relatively notable indie label.  It's not as hard as it is to establish notability for a biography or an organization.  In keeping with our philosophy as a wiki that anyone should edit, we shouldn't be going around pages throwing salt down on anything that gets deleted a few times.  It's bad form, and makes it very difficult for those who don't understand what DRV and AfD is.  Personally, I think salt should be applied only in cases of extreme vandalism on a non-notable topic, or in cases where an article will never, ever be allowed for creation, such as Daniel Brandt.  Anything else detracts too much from the wiki philosophy and doesn't allow people to go about their business without a knowledge of Wikipedia's machinations like our first rule states we should be able to.  Also, delete as not-notable.Celarnor Talk to me  02:06, 26 March 2008 (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.