Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phi in the Sky


 * 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The result was   nomination withdrawn. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Phi in the Sky

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Declined speedy; possible NN EP because the band whose EP this is does not have a Wikipedia article. Speedy was declined because apparently this article had been speedied then restored before. I'm afraid I don't know the reliability of the one reference provided.  role player 00:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn. --  role player 18:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:04, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * They were all arbitrarily deleted as A7. I completely disagree with assessment and so I've restored the articles associated with Kidneythieves. I ask that the nominator do some research on the subject and flesh out this nomination beyond some mere formality. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 05:24, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Grouping the relevant articles under one nomination would also be useful. As for the merits of the band, it has been covered in multiple newspaper articles home and abroad, major online publications and released albums on several notable indie labels. Though, in all fairness, the stubs did not indicate any of this. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 05:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I apologies for the way this was nominated, maybe I should have looked into the sources before I nom'd. Still I know for next time.  Just to answer one of your points though I think you may be confusing me with the admin who deleted the articles under A7 to start with - when I arrived at this situation there were no articles to group, just this one. --  role player 18:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - this EP was reviewed at AllMusic, with a link already in the article. That usually suffices for a stub album article, but my vote is "weak" because the EP was not noticed too much elsewhere . Meanwhile, putting this band and everything they did up for speedy deletion was a serious mistake and possibly a misuse of the process, because the original nominator could have easily done more research. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 15:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - and to the author: Billboard, CMJ Charting different CMJ Chart - Theornamentalist (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Just changed my vote from Weak Keep to Keep based on the extra sources found by Theornamentalist. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 15:25, 24 November 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.