Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Permanent Ability


 * 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 (NAC) RMHED (talk) 20:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Permanent Ability

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable band which doesn't pass WP:MUSIC. Also, if you look at the history, it appears as though this was created by Brian Lanese, the main vocalist, which is a major no no. The links go to local publications or MySpace. Basically a locally successful rock band. Not enough for our purposes User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 05:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  — J04n(talk page) 06:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Question. Does it have two notable members?--Epeefleche (talk) 11:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't believe so. Steve Andino is a member of the band who used to be in a band called Tourniquet, who has an article. However, he and only one other former member of that band have articles. And he hasn't done anything else to make him notable (there are 0 references in his article). As for the other linked member, Brian Lanese, its similar to Steve except Brian wasn't in any notable bands. I actually put Brian's article up for deletion for similar reasons as this one. My main issues are that the band itself isn't notable and its a self-written article with next to 0 independent sourcing. I don't think Steve's presence makes the band notable enough. There just isn't enough else there. --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 12:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that if it is NN, it should be deleted. As to the COI, I note that the COI guideline instructs us "Who has written the material should be irrelevant so long as these policies are closely adhered to.... However, an apparent conflict of interest is a good reason for close review by the community."--Epeefleche (talk) 12:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I feel Permanent Ability's page should NOT be deleted due to the notable accomplishments, regardless if they are an indie local band...google the band. These guys are on their way, and a Wikipedia page has to start somewhere. :Question. Why is it such a huge deal if the page stays? It's harming who? If its such an outrage, help make the page more wiki friendly!
 * There's no easy way to explain and define that, but this isn't the place to take it up. This discussion should relate as closely to Wikipedia guidelines and philosophy as much as possible. Speaking of sticking to deletion, could you please not delete the AfD discussion link section from your article? Pretty please? Such things tend to upset admins-- you should focus on your article; don't put yourself in danger at the same time. ♪ daTheisen(talk) 07:56, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. With the cited articles in the Columbus Dispatch http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/weekender/stories/2009/07/02/9A_LIME02_ART_07-02-09_T14_MIEB3NJ.html?sid=101 and Tastes Like Rock http://www.tasteslikerock.com/interviews.html I think they scrape a pass per criterion #1 of WP:BAND. I'm not overly concerned about the COI issue since the article isn't intolerably promotional, and although writing an article about oneself or one's own band is generally discouraged, the important thing is that the author/ editor in this case appears to be honest and upfront about it, which I respect. Contains Mild Peril (talk) 08:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * Keep per CMP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Epeefleche (talk • contribs) 02:00, 24 November 2009


 * Keep, sources meet WP:GNG. Andrea105 (talk) 03:29, 24 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.