Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gruvis Malt


 * 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   keep. (I closed this early because this was technically a review of an earlier deletion and not a regular AFD) Mgm|(talk) 09:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Gruvis Malt

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

Article has been speedied due to lack of proof of notability, then moved to user space for reworking. Primary contributor has in good faith tried to rework the material to establish notability, and has requested an AfD to solicit opinions regarding notability and suitability. I've no objections re: a speedy close if there is support for the band's notability. Ckatz chat spy  04:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Found some newspaper articles about Gruvis Malt (at Highbeam Research). Some of these are just ads for them playing at a specific venue, but some are interviews/reviews by real newspapers.  Unfortunately, these aren't all free, but I've found some of the articles (look on the Gruvis Malt talk page. --Ccomics88 (talk) 05:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, and add the *right* sources this time Google News has plenty of RS hits for them. Jclemens (talk) 07:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree with, there are sources to support a claim to notability. &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  17:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  17:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Included the news sources from Google in the article.  --Ccomics88 (talk) 17:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, the article is now well-sourced and does enough to establish notability. Capitalistroadster (talk) 19:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I made some general improvements to the wording and punctuation of the article as part of the Article Rescue Squadron. Magnetic Rag (talk) 22:37, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per above. EagleFan (talk) 01:26, 26 February 2009 (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.