Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finished With My Ex (2nd nomination)


 * 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. The "keep" opinions argue that we should retain the article "despite the article lacks coverage in independent reliable sources", in one commentator's words, but per WP:V that's a no-go. If such sources can be procured, including Portuguese newspaper sources, as per the discussion between Salgado96 and Ritchie333, the article can be userfied and later recreated.  Sandstein  09:16, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Finished With My Ex
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Big promotional lovefest for this SoundCloud/BandCamp band. Falls short of notability. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Current sourcing mostly by themselves or them talking about themselves. source 8 and 9 (at time of nomination) are independent but are unrelated to the band. Only other sources are a forum post (2) and Blog do Submarino which is trivial coverage and not a reliable source. I found nothing better. No sign of charting. No sign of major awards. Releases are self released free internet downloads, not on an important label. A little local airplay falls well short of national rotation. Nothing satisfying WP:MUSIC. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Coverage appears limited to blogs, forums, and social media pages. I'm unable to find material in independent reliable sources for this group; does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:BAND at this time. If deleted, please note the related album/song articles (listed at Finished With My Ex) which should also be deleted.  Gongshow  Talk 17:52, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. No reliable sources whatsoever, all referenced self published or insignificant stuff. Telling quote in the article is ""Studio time is extremely expensive and difficult to obtain."", which is of course because they don't have a record company to pay for it. Unsalvageable WP:GARAGE. -- Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   18:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't think it's fair the article to be removed, because here, in Portugal, we don't have a lot of weblinks to justify when we write an article about portuguese bands (it's an example). Well, I have sources from newspappers that talk about the band... I noticed that Marilyn Manson's album "portrait of an american family" article's most information is taken from magazines, book, etc. I have newspappers here, but will they work as good sources? By the way, "Studio time is extremely expensive and difficult to obtain" sentence was taken from an article here in wikipedia about independent music, where a band from australia, "X-bloom" (which works the same way "Finished With My Ex" does), made a "complete proof-of-concept" album with no budget and they said "Studio time is extremely expensive and difficult to obtain", so I used it to justify the band's options. This band is also likely to sign to a label, since their working on their debut studio album and they said it was going to be "a big deal", since they would going to record the songs in a studio, just like Bruce explained during the July interview to Guimarães Radio. Oh, and their just not a "soundcloud/bandCamp band", they just feel comfortable with releasing music independently, just like Trent Reznor or Radiohead do. Their actually pretty known in Guimarães and Braga city, since the vocalist is from Guimaraes and the others members from Braga. Please help me. Thank you, -- Salgado96. 21:19, 30 November 2012‎ (UTC)
 * I apologise if I sounded like I'm being confrontational, but if you follow the link to WP:GARAGE, you'll see why it's easy to assume that if a band article doesn't have any references to reliable sources, it's likely not to have any at all, and hence not be notable. I think all of the references cited in the article are self-published, such as blogs, the band's own website, Twitter etc. and when I did a web search for the band's name, all I could really find was a selection of YouTube videos, which are generally (though I argued against one specific case recently) considered unreliable. For what it's worth, I play in a band that does about 60-70 shows a year, and make enough money out of it for the taxman to tap on my shoulder, but there is not a single reliable source that talks about it so it can't have an article on Wikipedia. It's not important what the likelihood of you singing to an album is, until you are and have a couple of records released in the usual commercial channels, ideally hitting the charts, you probably won't pass the notability guidelines for musicians. See WP:TOOSOON for an explanation of why some things just can't have an article now, even though they might in the future.
 * Now, having said all of that, if you do have lots of newspaper coverage of the band, they can be used as reliable sources, and print sources are certainly acceptable - see WP:CITEHOW for information on this. Print sources are some of the best sources you can use - I'm currently going through Keith Moon picking out bits from two well known book sources. But the group won't generally be considered notable enough unless that's repeated exposure in the major national press such as Rolling Stone or New Musical Express. There are so many non-notable bands bouncing around that the barrier to get them in their own article on Wikipedia is quite high. -- Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   22:47, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the help Ritchie333! :) but, how can I "use" the newspapers as references? just write a line and then write the reference like "taken from Newspaper "blah blah blha", on "xx day, yy month yy year", etc."? The newspapers are not that known in the whole world (Portugal doesn't have much, unfortunately, its a country that doesn't give importance to culture and arts nowadays), but their like the most famous newspapers in the city of Guimaraes, besides, Guimaraes is now a city full cosmopolitanism, since it is the 2012 European Capital of Culture and has been promoting their local bands through these newspapers, "Finished With My Ex" is one of those :) "Submarino" is a group of producers and "radio people" that take care of that, and the band gave the interview to them as being part of the revelation bands of the city, you know :) ... I think if you search information for the 2012 European capital of culture, you will find a lot of information connected with the music that it's made in this region. As for the way the radio and social communications use blogs, forum, etc to promote themselves, its probably because the production can't afford an independent website, just like most musicians in Portugal. Example, Slimmy, a musician from Oporto, Portugal, became known for making a revolution in the "post-CD era" in Portugal, he started supporting the independent musicians and now, there are lot of known Portuguese bands, like Xutos&pontapes, following his example... Finished With My Ex is one of them :) Thank you very much again, waiting feedback. --Salgado96 23:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You need to start with the sources. Find as many newspaper and magazine articles as you can, ideally those that have nationwide coverage. You need to have several of them, quite how much "several" is really depends on what people currently voting "delete" will satisfy a demonstration of notability, but I would recommend getting hold of as much as you possibly can. Nevertheless, without having any national chart success, I don't fancy your chances on getting a consensus that the band is notable - most bands that are worthy of notice have had some chart success somewhere in the world at some point in their career, even if it's two weeks at number 97. The only British band I can think of that's had a long standing Wikipedia article without any chart hits whatsoever is Dumpy's Rusty Nuts, and they're only really notable because they were a standing joke in the Melody Maker. Don't go anywhere near Facebook, Soundcloud, YouTube etc. - that won't help keep an article. Since this is a Portuguese band, you might have more success asking on the Portuguese Wikipedia. -- Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   16:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - despite the article lacks coverage in independent reliable sources, I understand Salgado96's situation, since here in Portugal is true that most social communications work that way... Either way, I know the band and I've already seen it live in Guimaraes, but honestly I didn't really like their performance, they're too "shocking",,, but that's just my opinion... As for their "fame" they've been appearing in several newspapers around here, but those newspapers are not that known, but I think they can work as sources, but I'm not sure. User:Portugalmade —Preceding undated comment added 18:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all, I don't think we're here to discuss our musical opinion about the band. It's your opinion, keep it to yourself and start doing what's more important here. Thank you, User:Salgado96. 19.02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep or re-edit - well, I have the idea to say to keep the article, because I agree with both Portuguese users, if it is not possible, I thought about re-editing the article, by putting less information, the information that are taken from reliable sources (or something close to that. By the way, Portugalmade, you honestly don't understand the band's concepts, I also don't like their style, find it a bit excessive, but their shows are amazing and they work a lot for their music and shows. I think you shouldn't talk when you don't anything (or almost nothing) about the band. Fiftim (talk) 19:04, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Excessive? Don't you like Rammstein?? (talk) 19:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Please, can you two stop with that? I'm worried about my work, that toke me a hundred years to write, which will probably be DELETED! ANd you guys are not helping! I mean, you're both voting to keep the article, but your opinions about your favorite bands, etc. have no purpose here! (talk) 19:16, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If consensus is to delete, the closing administrator will usually put a copy of the article in your userspace if you request it, as long as it's not blatant copyright violations or an attack page (which this isn't). So don't worry too much about losing work. -- Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   23:37, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


 * This seems to meet CSD G11 and A7; there's no justification for it to be kept. Delete. -- =) khfan93 (t) (c) 20:27, 8 December 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.