Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Machines Of Desire

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. [[smoddy ]] 19:42, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Machines Of Desire
Non-notable band. Only one Google hit. KeithD (talk) 12:31, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Note: The article in question was moved early on, during in the deletion discussion, and the text was nominated for deletion under the new title as well, as a result, there was a second discussion about what to do with the content at: Votes_for_deletion/List_of_small_bands --Mysidia (talk) 21:35, 24 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable. No allmusic entry for either Machines of Desire or Ryan Arch Peever. Al 12:37, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all above is correct. feydey 16:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Please note that this article was renamed to List of small bands during this discussion by User:Ed Poor, who also removed the VFD notice from the article. We now have Votes for deletion/List of small bands, as well. Uncle G 18:34:04, 2005-08-24 (UTC)
 * Gosh, you make it sound like a bad thing. If I messed up, why not simply undo it? Why all this fuss? Whatever happened to the wiki way? Since when must bold action be thwarted with 3-day and 7-day voting procedures? I'm not going to edit war over this. If there's a policy (or even a convention) that non-notable bands aren't worthy of an article, why is there even a vote? I'm an admin, just tell me to delete the page, for Pete's sake! (Instead of making a federal case out of it - and refusing to explain anything other than to say these are the rules and read the rules again. Do you think I'm too stupid to understand a simple explanation? Or what? Uncle Ed 19:39, August 24, 2005 (UTC))
 * I don't think Uncle G was having a go at you, simply explaining the situation to anyone who happened upon this VfD, because of the unconventional nature of these two particular VfDs. Also, I think there's a difference between being bold, and circumventing concensus-building. The reason for the vote is so that people can come to a concensus as to whether a band is notable or not. (Ed and I have been discussing the moving of VfD articles on his talk page, if anyone is interested). KeithD (talk) 20:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nn. Best to speedy it. --Blackcap | talk 22:20, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. -- Etacar11   02:35, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable - T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  16:34, 29 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.