Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loci (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 to delete, nor consensus to keep the article, but the looks like the discussion is leaning towards keep. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 02:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Loci (band)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Speedy denied. Admins really should check the sources and not just claim that sources are shown to establish notability. All source are self published. Ridernyc (talk) 22:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * sometimes admins DO check sources. See: this one the article cites and this one and this one too and this one and this one also.  It should be noted that the denial of a speedy is NOT an edorsement of the article NOR is it a statement that the article should not be deleted.  Speedy deletion for A7 is only for cases where the article does not make any claims about being notable; this one clearly does, and so should be up for discussion.  If these sources do not make the article notable, then everyone will agree with you.  I am official neutral, and will make my decision later based on the arguements made by both sides in this one.  --Jayron32| talk | contribs  23:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * And editors should check speedy deletion policy before accusing admins of getting it wrong. WP:CSD says, "This is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources". If you want to delete something based on lack of independent reliable sources then this (AfD) is the way to do it. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate you checking the sources Jayron32. As you say, the sources are NOT all self published at all-I have included a number of sources published by third parties which I believe make a case for notability.

Iciclecake (talk) 09:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)iciclecake


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  00:31, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - enough sources to meet WP:BAND. JohnCD (talk) 09:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * what part of WP:BAND? Ridernyc (talk) 19:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Please see article 11 of WP:BAND regarding radio airplay. As now discussed in the article with citations, this band has been regularly played on BBC radio-they even have their own featured page on the BBC website and the bands EP has a featured page too.

Also, article 4 which regards bands having completed 'a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country'-This band tours nationally, as can be seen from the sources.

Iciclecake (talk) 22:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)iciclecake
 * Weak keep - based on the reliable sources that could be gleaned from a 27 entry reference list for a 5 sentence article. Seriously, that needs some editorial work to trim it down to actual usable references and sources instead of what appears to be a desperate attempt to make sure there are references to avoid a deletion. -- Whpq (talk) 17:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: My weak keep is based on very thin reliable sources which essentially boil down to a couple of articles from the BBC, one of which is rather short. They are this album review which is the most substantial, and this short article indicating they have received radio airplay.  That's very weak in my opinion, but enough to squeak by on the keep side. -- Whpq (talk) 13:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok-I have edited the sources down considerably today- hope this improves the article.Iciclecake (talk) 10:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

35 google hits for The band name combined with the name of the EP. As far as meeting WP:Band, if someone wants to show me the source that shows they received airplay I'll be glad to look at it. As far as touring it has to be covered in reliable sources. Any band can book a tour getting it covered is the important part. Ridernyc (talk) 11:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment this google search basically disproves notabilty
 * Comment - the link I refer to in my note expanding on the reason for my weak keep nots that they have received airplay. -- Whpq (talk) 13:37, 15 January 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.