Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Periphery (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   no consensus. Second relisting failed to achieve consensus (per WP:RELIST) (non-admin closure) --Darkwind (talk) 22:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Periphery (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Band whose debut album is set to be released later this month. No evidence of nationwide or worldwide touring, no tracks in radio rotation, no awards. Their notability seems to hinge on the frontman's "reputation on the Internet", and a former member who is also a member of another band that is itself borderline.

I am also nominating the aforementioned as-yet-unreleased debut album:
 * &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 02:15, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * There's not much to be found in the way of reliable sources that would help support WP:GNG notability; I search the GNews archives, for example. Delete unless some sources are found before the end of this deletion discussion. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 02:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete both. I was unable to find significant coverage of the band or the album. I did find a pitchfork review of an album called Periphery by a different band:, but nothing else.  Jujutacular  T · C 03:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Their online following is considerable, but the challenge would be to find sources to corroborate that. It's obviously difficult to quantify, but for example Periphery currently has 2.5 million plays on Myspace, as opposed to, for example, Billy Ray Cyrus, who has 4.9 million. Not widely known, but not unheard of either; people pay to see them, at any rate. What sort of sources would be necessary to prove their notability such that we could stopgap this article until their album comes out on the 20th, when presumably there will be more mainstream coverage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.53.125 (talk) 05:21, 2 April 2010 (UTC) Here are a few independent sources:    I'm not going to lie, these are dubious as to the "non-trivial" criterion - but not deleting this article now will save it having to be re-created in 18 days, so maybe we should cut them a little slack. Periphery may also qualify on point 7 insofar as they are held up as a progenitor of "djent" math metal, which has gained traction in the Baltimore area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.53.125 (talk) 23:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC) They've been in rotation in Sirius XM's "Liquid Metal" station, and on miscellaneous college radio, including interview appearances on KALX, if I'm not mistaken. Any evidence of commercial airtime? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.53.125 (talk) 18:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: The notability criteria for bands and musicians is WP:BAND. If you can find any reliable sources (meaning: sources independent of the band with strict editorial standards; i.e. not blogs, forum posts, social networking pages, other wikis, or pages controlled by the band or their label or otherwise with a conflict of interest) showing that it meets any of those criteria, that would be sufficient to keep the article. &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 05:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Noisecreep article seems good: the article is clearly about them and appears to be written by a third party. The other two are reprinted press releases: Hardtimes.ca's comes from here, and the Altsounds article, though attributed to a staff writer, is also found here where it is specifically identified as a press release. Also, the article wouldn't have to be recreated in 18 days, because one album would not be sufficient to meet WP:BAND criterion #5 (two albums on a major or important indie label). As for being progenitors of "djent" math metal, you'd need a reliable source backing that claim: I was unable to find one (googling "djent metal" only brought up stuff like forums, mailing list archives, Last.FM, and Urbandictionary). &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 06:11, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Here is another independent source:  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamahomelessman (talk • contribs) 04:05, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There is evidence of nationwide touring, just not a lot of non-interview coverage thereof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.53.125 (talk) 20:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak keep (changed from "delete") on the basis of some non-press-release coverage, discussed above. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 00:35, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I was able to find stuff here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. I could keep going on, but you get the idea. I took links to news from both independent and Roadrunner sites.  Being signed to Roadrunner is an accomplishment for this band due to Roadrunner Records notability of signing metal bands.   Mr. C.C. Hey yo!I didn't do it! 16:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Those all appear to be blogs, mostly reprinting press releases, with the exception of the Roadrunner Records page, which is a press release full stop. The only ones that appear to be original are the metalhammer.co.uk article, which is pretty skimpy, and the metalsucks.net article, which is mostly about how some other band that sounds similar picked up their ex-lead vocalist. One of those links, the puregrainaudio.net one, even appears to be the same press release as the hardtimes.ca article linked earlier. We're still short on reliable sources, and I don't think circulating press releases supports a claim to notability through widespread media coverage. As far as the signing goes, that doesn't automatically confer notability pre WP:BAND: only releasing two or more albums on a notable label does. &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 18:15, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources. Being signged to a label is nice but the band could be adequately covered in the article on the label. RadioFan (talk) 17:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Excuse my incorrect formatting, I am not a Wiki-expert. Periphery is on tour in Australia with The Dillinger Escape Plan. How is that not notable enough to constitute allowing them to keep their Wiki page? -Ryan R. Koehler —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.17.71.202 (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Over 2.6 million views on their myspace profile without even a debut album release. I'm sure the album will atleast chart and allow this band to gain some significance.24.16.153.102 (talk) 03:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 20:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Maybe. We can't know that will happen until it does. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 16:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

Maybe this helps? The debut cd can be purchased a Bestbuy.com and in store as well. This is atleast testimony to how large their distributor is,smaller bands do not get this type of availability for their albums. []166.20.224.13 (talk) 19:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Album reviews are appearing, now that the album has been released. There's this in AbsolutePunk, and a brief concert review from the Dallas Observer. The Boston Globe says they are a "buzz band". Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 20:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Another album review

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℳøℕø 06:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Album is tracking #60 on iTunes album chart, and #4 on Amazon.com's Bestsellers in Hard Rock & Metal (see band and album pages for URLs). While we agree that wikipedia is no crystal ball, I don't think one can get those kind of sales numbers and NOT end up on the Billboard Top 200 when Billboard next updates, which would comply with point #2 on WP:BAND.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Incubate. While personally I would have left this for a few weeks until the album actually came out to see if more coverage emerged, this looks like a case of a band that is not yet sufficiently notable but will likely be so come May. Coverage found includes evidence of a couple of interviews, Blabbermouth.net news articles likely sourced largely from press releases (as, it should be noted, are a lot of newspaper articles), one from The Gauntlet, one from altsounds, a few non-staff reviews , a article and video from GuitarEdge.com (a recognized reliable source?), and a few more user-written things on various sites. Not enough to be convincing, but let's allow for it to be improved as more sources become available.--Michig (talk) 07:02, 25 April 2010 (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.