Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lordhelme

Article Lordhelme listed on WP:VFD Apr 21 to Apr 27 2004, consensus was to delete. Discussion:

20-30 hits, probably self-entered; feeds from DMOZ. If kept, article needs NPOV, spell crex, etc. Gotta love a "one-man" show with a "frontman", tho. Niteowlneils 18:09, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Seems to get a few mentions on relatively reputable sites. Keep. DJ Clayworth 19:47, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: vanity, personal promotion. Only other contributions of User:67.68.13.66 are to seed other articles with Lordhelme links. "Altough he was never officially signed to a recording label" -- you don't say. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:15, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, delete Dragon metal along with it if you would.. Rhymeless 04:45, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. With one exception, all pages found allow a person/band to list themselves.  That exception  shows Lordhelme having only two demos, the last one four years ago.  SWAdair | Talk  04:52, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think someone should take a good look as to whether "black metal" and "dragon metal" are legitimate "genres" too, though I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt right now.  But delete this vanity.  Postdlf  00:33  23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Black Metal is legitimate. Dragon metal is tripe. Rhymeless 00:24, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, not famous, all the Google hits seem to be entries on exhaustive lists of bands, and he has only released some self-published recordings. --Stormie 05:34, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - T&#949;x &#964; ur&#949; 15:28, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Wow, how did I manage to miss this one? Dragon metal, for crying out loud!  He gets a point or two for being original enough to envision a new rock genre, but otherwise delete on grounds of vanity. - Lucky 6.9 16:45, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

End discussion