Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exalted Saviour


 * 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.  Sandstein  08:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Exalted Saviour

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fringe metal band with only unreliable sources and blogs that discuss them. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:57, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:57, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:57, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:57, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - voicing  the nom, I see mentions but in unreliable sources. Celestina007 (talk) 12:15, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note - From my understanding, there needs to be coverage by at least three notable sources. Of which, I have supplied. There is many sources that are blogs, but there are at least three to four magazines that cover the band as well. Metalworker14 (Yo) 11:54, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There has to be significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. http://dougvanpelt.wixsite.com/heavens-metal-mag/single-post/2018/09/12/EXALTED-SAVIOUR-to-Rerelease-Blood-Sacrifice-on-New-Label may qualify as van Pelt is the founder and a reviewer for Heaven's Metal. A track listing of an album does not meet that requirement. The remainder are blogs, hobbyist, metal music enthusiasts, or otherwise poor sources. Which are the three you thought qualified? Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:13, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I believed that The Metal Resource was a reliable source and The Metal Onslaught's mention was reliable as well. I know there was an article covering the band in The Metal Onslaught, but I think that something happened to a lot of the website prior posts. It may be able to be found in Archives. --Metalworker14 (Yo) 02:22, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. What on https://www.themetalonslaught.com/about-us makes you think this is a professional review site? The brief mention of future work (with poor grammar: "has officially began work") and who exactly is mason7310? You can see why I don't think Metal Onslaught is reliable. I've never questioned Metal Resource, but I've never liked it. There is no general editorial policy, and the author of the article, thrashboy, is the co-founder of the site, but with no editorial oversight or anything that would make me think it's a reliable source I can't imagine why his news post would be considered reliable. Shall I take them to RSN? Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I requested input: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AReliable_sources%2FNoticeboard&type=revision&diff=933821382&oldid=933821274 The discussions do not last that long, so feel free to support their reliability there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  NNADI GOOD LUCK  ( Talk &#124; Contribs ) 04:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 08:38, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not pass notability criteria. No outward notability outside of Metal fansites, not even an Allmusic listing as far as I can see. The page does not assert any musical achievements have been accomplished such as charting or getting awards. Mattg82 (talk) 19:38, 15 January 2020 (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.