Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moutheater


 * 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   delete. As whpq says, "no prejudice against recreation when they pass from up and coming to arrived and notable" yandman  10:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Moutheater

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

Non-notable band, fails WP:MUSIC. The article lists a number of references, however: Furthermore, "Thrashed Records", their label, seems to be hosted by a larger "self-publishing"-type co., BigCartel which "helps you create a shop to sell your goods online with as little fuss as possible." In short, these guys seem to not have breached the "local bubble" yet. --AbsolutDan (talk) 20:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * # 1: appears to be a small-time web magazine
 * # 2 & # 3: blog
 * # 4 - # 6: TCC Times = (local) Tidewater Community College student paper
 * # 7: appears to be a small-time local publication
 * # 8: blog
 * # 9: domain consists of a for-sale sign (if it ever existed).
 * Delete: The article seems to be timed to promote their forthcoming record. No RS references so I went Googling. I am seeing a lot of non-RS coverage in Google but nothing RS on the first few pages or in Google News. The fact that they recorded with Steve Albini in 2007 (which would normally get you some coverage) and still made no mark seems to mark them out as moribund. Sure, they might prove me wrong, but they shouldn't have an article until they do. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete unless a good argument is put forward as to why any of the references are independent reliable sources. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 21:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails notability per WP:MUSIC. Searching pulls up no reliable, third-party, sources.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 12:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - there is some evidence that they meet WP:MUSIC due to touring much of North America. I think this one can be rescued. Bearian (talk) 21:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * According to WP:MUSIC (the current version, at least), there needs to be non-trivial coverage in a reliable source regarding said touring... comes down to WP:V, really, as most do... --AbsolutDan (talk) 21:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:MUSIC, per nom. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. All sources are inadequate. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 01:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep New references have been posted. One of which is a published magazine article in Sound magazine.  Moutheater is featured on the cover of this issue and has a multiple page feature article in the issue.  Sound is a distributed hard copy magazine not a "small time webzine" as is posted above.  Amvymra (talk) 05:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This Sound magazine? The one that seems to only have 1 issue thus far? And no indication of being a print magazine? Or am I missing something? --AbsolutDan (talk) 03:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - agreed, no RS and thus fail notability. -- Storm  Rider  03:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The band's label is being referenced when saying they haven't "breached the local bubble" when their label is based in Nashville TN, many miles away from the band. Also if you're to google "Moutheater Steve Albini" multiple websites come up verifying this claim. Sound is new publication that has 2 issues in print. They are a branch off of the long running Portfolio Weekly magazine.  Amvymra (talk) 05:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * One !vote per customer please. -- Whpq (talk) 12:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Also I'd like to add that the "article" in question is in fact a stub (which is meant for building off of). Not a full blown Wikipedia article.  Amvymra (talk) 05:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * See above regarding the label, I covered that. Also there's no need for you to repeat "keep" over and over. --AbsolutDan (talk) 03:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The band's label having a hosted online store really has nothing to do with their notability. I was just pointing out that while you say they haven't "breached the local bubble".  They've obviously drawn some attention from people in other areas. Amvymra (talk) 03:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: no reliable 3rd party coverage WP:BAND. JamesBurns (talk) 00:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - they appear to be an up and coming band, but a bunch of blogspot based reviews don't establish notability. This leaves only a single magazine article from a local publication to support notability.  That's not enough, but no prejudice against recreation when they pass from up and coming to arrived and notable. -- Whpq (talk) 00:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You're saying that there's only "a single magazine article" when in fact there are four. Two in different issues of Sound, one in the TCC Times and one in Portfolio Weekly.  I believe this makes them notable. Amvymra (talk) 21:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply: You're right about there being two articles from Sound.  That makes two articles in a local publication.  TCC is a student magazine from a college and doesn't make the cut for a reliable source for establishing notability, and Portfolio weekly is a brief mention.  Taking all of this into consideration, my opinion still remains that they don't quote establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 21:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the full paragraph in Portfolio is a lot more than a "brief mention".Amvymra (talk) 01:36, 5 March 2009 (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.