Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pele (band)

 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 COPYVIO, as the final editor points out. Will take to CP. -Splash talk 22:42, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Pele (band)
Delete Band vanity? PhilipO 21:24, September 6, 2005 (UTC)


 * Not written by a member of the band just a fan... 212.23.31.216
 * Comment Fair enough. Still don't see evidence that they are notable enough for inclusion. Still Delete. --PhilipO 21:33, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Not from the North West of England then? boggits 21:36, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * User's 5th comment from account created today . --PhilipO 21:39, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Remember that you are writing for a worldwide readership. Your article must be verifiable by people other than just those who are involved with the subject matter first-hand.  Editors generally require that articles on bands satisfy our WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines, too. Uncle G 22:52:20, 2005-09-06 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. Dottore So 22:17, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment According to this site: the band's singles made the TOP 75 or something; i dont know if that's enough to establish notability.--Carabinieri 22:43, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * That's the band's own web site. Can the chart position of the single be verified from a source other than the sole say-so of the band itself? Uncle G 22:52:20, 2005-09-06 (UTC)
 * Having a number 1 single in South Africa would satisfy the WP:MUSIC criteria, as would the three albums if M&G Records counted as a major label. However, the only source for the statement that there was a number 1 single is the web site of the band itself, and M&G Records does not appear, from this article alone, to have been major. If an independent source is cited to verify the single's chart position, or if it is demonstrated that M&G Records is a major label, Keep.  If, on the other hand, no sources are provided, that are independent of the band itself, for verifying that the criteria are satisfied, as is currently the case, Delete. Uncle G 22:52:20, 2005-09-06 (UTC)
 * Delete. Can't find them on allmusic.com. Gamaliel 23:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless it can be verified from the Guiness Book of British Hit Singles or similar that they have indeed had a top 100 hit.--Grcampbell 23:48, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * There's a scan on their home page from the book (see faq); are you suggesting it's a hoax? assume good faith... &mdash; brighterorange   (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Assuming good faith applies to Wikipedia editors, not to sources. Indeed, to sources such as this one, where the subject is providing the information about itself, exactly the opposite applies.  Autobiographies, be they people writing about themselves or bands writing about themselves, are not to be accepted unquestioningly.  Please read our verifiability policy.  We most definitely are not in the business of taking people's own unsupported words for things.  Good journalism involves having multiple independent reliable sources, and good encyclopaedism does too.  Grcampbell is quite right.  In light of how easy it is to do photo manipulation, the Guinness book itself should be consulted directly, or a source similarly independent of the band found. Uncle G 00:44:29, 2005-09-07 (UTC)
 * I have read the policy, of course. In this case, the page web cites a reliable source&mdash;which could be trivially incorporated into the article&mdash;and even provides a scan from the book. It's a verifiable reference. All I'm saying is, we should assume that a verifiable reference is not a hoax until we have good reason to believe otherwise. I believe this is implied by assume good faith. Are you suggesting that we adopt, or already have, a delete-until-proven-true policy? &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 14:31, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * comment Note, it may be a copyvio from the band home page linked, if those weren't both written by the same person. The claims on the table seem to pass WP:MUSIC, but it's not clear if they are true or not. Also, there is another band called Pele from the US that is, at least in my musical circles, what people mean when they say Pele (see AMG). A mess, truly. &mdash; brighterorange   (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. All their claims to notability are lies. Proto t c 09:39, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

PELE, UK male/female vocal/instrumental group (3 WEEKS) 15 Feb 92 	Megalomania M&G MAGS 20		73 	1 week 13 Jun 92	Fair Blows The Wind For France M&G MAGS 24	62 	1 week 31 Jul 93	Fat Black Heart	M&G MAGCO 43	75 	1 week However, the Del Amitri bulletin board had a feature on Pele supporting Del Amitri on a UK tour which would meet WP:music see this cache. Ian Prowse subsequently formed a band called Amsterdam so he may also qualify as a famous member. This bulletin board refers to them supporting The Pogues see. Keep as meeting WP:music but possibly move to Pele (UK band) with a disambiguation on Pele (band) to refer to the US band cited on Allmusic.com. Capitalistroadster 13:56, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * comment Three top 75 singles and all in 18th Edition of British Hit Singles & Albums book (published 20th May 2005), although not quite sure how I get a copy online without breaching copyright. boggits 17:32, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Other reference
 * From the 2000/2001 copy:
 * Allmusic.com has an article on a band called Pele but this band is from the Midwest.
 * Delete The whole article is copied word for word. I'm sure this breaches copyright. Ackie00 21:15, 11 September 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.