Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galbatron


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 16:22, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Galbatron

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I had previously deleted this as a speedy due to copyright violations of their website. At the time I also noticed that the page had serious, SERIOUS issues with tone. They make claims, but didn't back them up with reliable sources (WP:RS), instead telling the user to "google the band". I did a google search, but didn't find anything that actually backed up any of the claims. I recently got a post on my page saying that this article predated the current website (unknown if this text appeared on the original, older website), but the user claimed that the band took this content from the article here. (But also claimed that Wikipedia has full permissions to use the content, which sort of conflicts with the idea that this was all posted on Wikipedia first.) I honestly don't see where this passes notability guidelines, but assuming good faith I've restored this so it can be discussed at AfD. The only two claims on the article that look like they would be of any true notability is the review (which I can't locate anywhere) and the claim that their music is housed in the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. If it is housed there as a main exhibit, then that would help give notability. However I cannot find any mention of the band in the museum's website and again, a search brings up absolutely nothing that I could use towards notability. The claims of selling well on MP3.com don't really mean for much, as that's not the type of charting that would count towards notability on Wikipedia. Selling well doesn't guarantee notability, it just means that coverage might be easier to find. While it's always possible that there is coverage that predates the internet, I kind of doubt that enough would exist that could show notability enough to pass WP:BAND. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   13:12, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable band which fails Notability (music) generally and Notability (music) specifically (ie 'For composers and performers outside mass media traditions'). Keri (talk) 16:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:51, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not fulfil Notability criteria. 188.222.98.201 (talk) 02:22, 25 July 2013 (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.