Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LMFAO


 * 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   redirect to LOL. (non-admin closure) Sceptre (talk) 11:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

LMFAO

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

not notable; fails WP:BAND, WP:MUSIC and WP:NOTE. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 00:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to LOL. JuJube (talk) 01:04, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: If not deleted, that sounds good to me. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 01:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Being signed to Interscope is the only reason I'd deny an A7. Then redirect to LOL per above. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there any particular reason the articles in The Source and DJbooth&mdash;both articles being solely about this group, albeit short&mdash;and the not-nontrivial, although not particularly significant, coverage in the LA Times are not sufficient to grant notability? They're signed to a major record label, and the aforementioned coverage grants them notability. seresin ( ¡? )  01:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Meh. Very trivial. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, return to redirect to LOL Hijacked redirect to LOL for a non-notable band. Salt it so it stays that way.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete--not notable, despite the appearance of having sources to provide notability. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect back to LOL - non-notable band. Per Mrschimpf above, protect LMFAO.  Matt  (  Talk  )   07:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Deletion would remove the history of the article for the dates prior to when the redirect was put in place. If any deletion is going to take place, it should be selective. (personally I think reinstating the redirect and protecting it would be a better alternative if the choice is removal). - Mgm|(talk) 09:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Retain because there are articles to establish WP:MUS notability which says only ONE of the 12 criteria need to be met and criteria 1 is met in the page. Snoopyloopy (talk) 10:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Which one? -- Gmatsuda (talk) 11:07, 17 December 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.