Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Messiah (British 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   keep. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Messiah (British band)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A band. The author claims that they are notable but seems to think it unnecessary to provide evidence. &mdash; RHaworth 09:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC) &mdash; RHaworth  09:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. A Google Books search would have found an entry in The Encyclopedia of Popular Music (which also lists an additional album) and several other derived volumes, and a Google News search an album review in the Los Angeles Times. Two albums released on WEA and Thirsty Ear means that criterion 5 of WP:BAND is indeed met. It's always worth searching on Allmusic before bringing a music article to AFD and there's a bio and a review there also, plus details of a single which charted highly on three US charts. It's a shame nobody appears to have pointed the article's author towards improving the article with such sources, which would be a much better outcome than deletion. --Michig (talk) 17:38, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Michig. After the original speedy deletion (which I missed) and subsequent undeletion, I indicated the record labels within the discography in order demonstrate the article meets BAND #5. expensivehat (talk) 07:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It's always helpful to include sources when creating articles. Some are available online, as indicated above. I'll add the Encyclopedia of Popular Music later when I have more time. --Michig (talk) 07:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 02:02, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I figured an external link to a discogs site would suffice, in general; not so? Should it be a reference instead of an external link?  Or are discogs-type sites generally not considered cite-worthy?expensivehat (talk) 10:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * discogs is a useful place to start when adding a discography but it isn't generally considered a reliable source as the content is user-submitted.--Michig (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * 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.