Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flying Testicle (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. Closing based on early consensus. Thanks everyone! Missvain (talk) 17:00, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Flying Testicle
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Another stub article about a non-notable band, this time about a noise music supergroup. Even though it had notable members such as the master of noise, Merzbow himself, the sourcing is beyond abysmal - Discogs and Musicbrainz still don't establish notability. They don't have an article on jpwiki either. When I searched for their albums, I only found the standard unreliable sites. By the way, this is the second nomination, as this article survived an AfD back in 2014 when it was closed as "no consensus" - it was basically kept just because the band had notable members. They sure did, but the sourcing is dreadful and it hasn't been changed ever since. Sourcing is the heart and soul of WP, basically. This can safely be included in any of the members' articles, but please, someone tell me, why do we need stubs like this which merely state that the band has existed and they were active at some point? That is the job of a database, and Wikipedia is not supposed to be a database. That's why I always cringe when I see unreliably sourced (or not even sourced whatsoever) stubs which merely announce the subject exists. Not just about bands, about anything. (I have been told at past AfDs that the "dark ages" of Wikipedia was in the 2000s, when lots of stubs were written, masquerading as articles, that merely announced the subject's existence. This was written in 2007. Since WP has lots and lots of articles, these tend to be forgotten, so that's why they survive for too long.) So, to the point: non-notable band. Btw, I love the name too. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom...do love the name thou Kolma8 (talk) 17:59, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Soon to be “the deleted flying testicle.” Seriously, why are some of these not speedy-deleted?  Fails every notability test. Star7924 (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, it doesn't fail every notability test, because at least it had notable members. But the sourcing is abysmal and I couldn't find anything reliable. Like I said, this can be included in any of the members' articles, and the title can stay as a redirect. But that's it. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 06:40, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment  I see your point. Star7924 (talk) 18:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete As per nom. Akronowner (talk) 11:48, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - It is true that the group had notable members, which technically satisfies one of WP's notability guidelines. But that does not matter because Flying Testicle accomplished little in its own right, much less anything that generated reliable media coverage. The band can be listed briefly as a side project in each of the members' individual articles. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 15:38, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Also note that Flying Testicle is already listed at the discography for workaholic Masami Akita, better known as Merzbow, who has 346 of his own albums, a few dozen collaborative albums, and numerous side projects. Many get little media coverage but are worthy of being listed in his history for encyclopedic purposes. Individual articles are rarely merited, including this one for Flying Testicle. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 15:47, 16 December 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.