Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Radicals (band)


 * 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 no consensus. Core desat 03:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Free Radicals (band)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable band, fails WP:MUSIC Mr Senseless (talk) 22:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

New notable citations have been added: It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable. Those sources are now listed. Sarsnic (talk) 23:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Independent sources are an integral part of any article, but the band itself still needs to pass the guidelines in WP:MUSICw and the sources are what can prove that, which as of right now, the band does not. Mr Senseless (talk) 19:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * But, Mr Senseless, if a band is "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works..." then it does pass WP:MUSIC criterion #1 and that is all that's needed. -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 00:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * With a second set of sources, WP:MUSIC is passed, but the notes you put in link to the Knight Rider Wikipedia article, not the actual article you're referencing. If you fix it so they point to the reference, I'll withdraw the AfD. Mr Senseless (talk) 06:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The articles are not accessible online without paying a fee, so I did not include links. You can find one here and the other here. -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 17:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, although I'd pefer to see something that readers could actually click to and read, seeing the links above makes me feel better. I withdraw the AfD Mr Senseless (talk) 00:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete Source 1 strikes out as trivial coverage. I suppose that 2 and 3 could be considered non-trivial, but they're about the same album (one's only a paragraph long), and to extract notability from them seems to be reaching a bit.  Sing  Cal  01:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable nobody. Seal Clubber (talk) 02:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- --  pb30 < talk > 23:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * In addition to the two non-trivial articles from the Houston Press that were already there, I have now added two more from the Knight Ridder newswire. Together, it's enough for WP:MUSIC criterion #1. Keep. -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 02:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per new cites from Eric. hateless 01:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I added in a new quote and note from the New Yorker. Sarsnic (talk) 03:21, 27 February 2008 (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.