Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I SQUARE


 * 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.  Sandstein  16:58, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I SQUARE

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. Article about a band with no strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC, which relies entirely on primary sources that cannot carry notability. There may be a stronger notability claim here than advertised, because what the article says right now is that they peaked at #1038 on a chart that only goes up to #100 -- so that might potentially be a typo for a significantly stronger chart position, but it might also still just be bullcrap as the link provided as referencing for it fails to actually verify that they charted at all. Accordingly, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody can locate significantly better evidence that they actually satisfy NMUSIC #2, but the claim of charting has to be verifiable (and higher than 938 positions below the bottom) before it constitutes a valid reason for a Wikipedia article. Bearcat (talk) 22:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. I've corrected the data error in the article -- they did hit No. 88 on the Airplay chart in 2011 (the '1038 for a day' was added by an IP vandal in February of this year).  But is peaking at No. 88 on the Airplay chart enough for an article?  I note that the Airplay chart is just one component of what goes into Billboard's Hot 100, so I'm not sure that this one placement really counts for notability.  And the article offers no other evidence of notability.  If someone can demonstrate that a low placement on the Airplay chart is generally accepted -- by itself -- as evidence of notability, I'll be happy to reconsider my recommendation.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Per Record charts, Airplay is technically permitted as a second string chart (it's listed in a "you may add this chart if none of the first section charts are applicable" section), but I agree that if it's the only thing we can reliably source about the band, then it's not a particularly strong slamdunk of a notability claim. WP:NMUSIC, after all, specifically requires sourcing, and explicitly states that nominal passage of a criterion does not exempt a band from having to be the subject of enough RS coverage to pass WP:GNG. Bearcat (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2016 (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.