Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everything Is Made in China


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 02:17, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Everything Is Made in China

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:A7 deletion was contested. Decision at deletion review was to reverse the A7 deletion and bring the article to AfD for a closer look. My role here is strictly administrative; I offer no opinion on the outcome. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:24, 1 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I was the one who re-created the article some days ago, and who contested the A7 deletion afterwards. See my comments on the A7 discussion for my rationale about the band's notability. I have added a couple of references to the restored article. Regardless of the final outcome on this article, it is my opinion that the current Wikipedia guidelines for bands' notability are too harsh, and go against Wikimedia Foundation ultimate vision of storing all of the knowledge of the human race.  -rsanchezsaez (talk) 17:05, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 11:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 11:31, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete - "the sum of all knowledge" - not all knowledge and everything, ever, indiscriminately. Whether you like it or not, we have rules that require things to meet specific inclusion criteria before they are... you know... included. Facebook likes is not an inclusion criteria. There are arbitrary rules for bands, yes, but we still have WP:GNG as a fall back in case they have received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources while still not "hitting the big time". In this instance we have one single example of coverage but not much else. That wouldn't seem to be enough at the moment.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 07:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 04:04, 9 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti*Let's talk!* 04:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can't find anything that indicates how these guys meet the guidelines for inclusion set out at WP:BAND. — sparklism hey! 21:47, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:BAND. --Bejnar (talk) 20:36, 23 December 2014 (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.