Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No Bra (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. NW ( Talk ) 22:57, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

No Bra (band)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Removed PROD. Reason was "No indication of notability unreferenced, only relevant google hit is the artist's MySpace page. In short, fails WP:BAND." PROD was added by and seconded by   Lord Spongefrog,  (I am the Czar of all Russias!)  15:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 15:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. No sources, fails WP:MUSIC, unless being featured in many unremarkable compilations is an assertion of notability. Victão Lopes  I hear you... 17:48, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete As I said on the talk page: Refs 1-3, 6 are trivial mentions and refs 4 and 5 don't discuss the band at all, only a single song by them that is barely famous let alone notable. I didn't try a google search because I was in a public place and I feared what "No bra" would bring up.--TParis00ap (talk) 21:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as it stands. A couple of endorsements by DJs is a start, but we need more than that. Will reconsider if substantial coverage from reliable sources are pointed out. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 07:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete-- No. As they're being added, resources are being misquoted or just simply invented and that is simply not acceptable. Credit is due to the person trying to update the article as they seem to have the skills of an expert PR agent to spin around so many words, but we can't have it on Wikipedia. The soundtrack? A movie barely worth mention in a pop culture sense and has 53 other songs on it. Ballet? The performance featured the music, but saying they "based a ballet performance" is false, and according to the source it was a 2-month stint somewhere and not "toured around Europe". The art? Yes, it's of the musician, but in the article one piece of art is related. Not multiple things, not things from more than one person. Saying "has inspired several visual artists such as..." is 100% false unless a different source is given. I know it can be common for band articles to not sound entirely neutral, but even then you can't lie or change what was published. Change that all and make up the source list from scratch so that at least one part of WP:BAND guidelines are met, and I'll gladly think it over. ♪ daTheisen(talk) 19:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 15:57, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep – the subject seems to have some coverage in reliable sources, enough to meet WP:BAND criterion #1. Article in Diva, review in Pitchfork, a non-trivial mention in Libération, and even a non-trivial mention in The Guardian. And that was just with a few minutes of searching. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 01:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks more like evidence of the band being notable as attention-seekers than anything else, but it's an improvement on the original list of references. Change to neutral, on the proviso that if the article stays, some of the more extravagant claims need to be put into context. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:56, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Strong Keep No Bra is the primary expression of Susanne Oberbeck, a significant contemporary multimedia artist - 3,850 hits on Google, including quite a few profiles. She has toured internationally, gaining press in the process, which satisfies WP:BAND. The article does need more work. It could possibly be redirected/merged into an as yet uncreated article about her. Wwwhatsup (talk) 21:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've put a redirect on Susanne Oberbeck. Wwwhatsup (talk) 21:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Easily satisfies notability requirements with multiple WP:RS coverage. It does seem like some WP:BEFORE work should have been done by nominator. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:18, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. sourced provided by editors above indicate that the band is notable. --Pink Bull (talk) 22:26, 10 November 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.