Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peeved


 * 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. Consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines. Any editor can then create a sutiable redirect if required. Davewild (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Peeved

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

An unnotable, defunct band. I can find no reference to this band at all in any reliable third party sources. All I'm really finding are mirrors of this article. Amusingly enough, a bunch of (not very good) online dictionaries seemed to have picked up this article to copy as an alternate definition for the word peeve. Only one member of the band appears to have gone on to any sort of independent notability at all (and even that is extremely marginal at best) and it doesn't meet any of the other criteria of WP:NBAND. Rorshacma (talk) 19:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm finding no coverage in reliable sources for this group; does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:BAND.  Gongshow  Talk 20:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Hue  Sat  Lum  16:14, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  →TSU tp* 10:57, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect to peevishness. Me, I'm peeved that lots of commonplace concepts such as this are covered by us primarily as the names of bands (e.g. pixies, sculptured, slayer, &c.) Warden (talk) 13:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of WP:RS Surprising this has been here since 2005 --Artene50 (talk) 05:19, 26 June 2012 (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.