Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frantic Amber


 * 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 rough consensus sides for deletion. –MuZemike 18:54, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Frantic Amber

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

I'm on the fence here. Although this article has quite a bit of information, it still seems to violate WP:BAND because they're an unsigned band that has never charted anywhere, and all the references appear to be mirrors of each other (well, the English-language references, anyway). Erpert (let's talk about it) 07:32, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. This looks good enough to me, with all the links on the web.  –BuickCenturyDriver 08:09, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Dear Erpert, I think the article does not violate the rules. Unsigned does not mean that it does not exist. It is an encyclopedia and I think grammy nomination for a band is not that much required to be enlisted in wiki. I can show you a lot of band which did not get grammy nomination and sometimes they were in unsigned condition also. Vandalism is not a good thing. Regards--- User talk:Rabbanituhin —Preceding undated comment added 08:12, 20 November 2010 (UTC).
 * Consider reading WP:ITEXISTS and WP:OTHERSTUFF. Erpert (let's talk about it) 08:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. This seems to me a nice article with proper references. –User:Indro Zit Kumar Saha 20 November 2010 (UTC) — Indro Zit Kumar Saha (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete. Might be months away from meeting notability requirements that might be too harsh, but they can have a WP article then.  For now, they might also be months away from imploding.  If I had a nickel for every band about which I've said, "They'll go far" but turned out to be wrong ....  Yakushima (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:03, 20 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - a lot of web links is not the same as having coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. I do not see any significant coverage.  The ones in the article aren't.  Nor am I able to find any.  As such, they do not meet the general notability guidelines nor do I see anything that allows them to meet WP:BAND. -- Whpq (talk) 17:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete a nicely laid out article of a non-notable band, looks impressive at first glance but really it is all smoke and mirrors. General announcement (talk) 00:32, 26 November 2010 (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.