Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poizon Green


 * 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 of the debate was Delete.  (aeropagitica)  19:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Poizon Green
Delete. Please delete this page, because it had been a victim of vandalism many times in recent days. The page is about a minor band in Bangladesh, however i am not to judge if it's deserving of it's own spot in Wikipedia. Abid Ahmed 14:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)Abid Ahmed


 * Comment &mdash; I'm not convinced that they are non-notable. Some reviews indicate they have a growing fan base and are one of the better known new bands (in their genre) within the region. The page seemed to start off harmlessly enough. But some of the edits have been of a non-neutral, publicity-seeking variety. &mdash; RJH 20:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep if what the article states is true they are notable. Vandalism is not a reason for deletion. Eivindspeak! 23:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

'This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!' Could use just a little bit more discussion to get things right.W.marsh 16:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, the current article does not assert notability of the band. 2,800 ghits, but the first page of listed links go to either the band's website, lyrics, or forum posts. &mdash; Kimchi.sg | Talk 16:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, fails to assert notability, could be speedied. Henning Makholm 17:14, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Week keep. Nominator has repeatedly reverted attempts to assert notability, citing "vandalism". Give the poor article a chance. Henning Makholm 17:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. It doesn't seem that they meet the requirements for inclusion. Brian G. Crawford 17:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per Henning Makholm - Paulus89 17:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The reverted "attempts to assert notability" Henning Makholm is referring to in his revised vote look like pure, shameless self-promotion to me. They do not add any verifiable notability. This looks like garbage to me. The parts that might be verifiable fail WP:BAND. Grand  master  ka  19:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 05:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, Just putting my two words in. The vandals have not yet confirmed their claim despite multiple requests. I, personally, don't think this article meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. Abid Ahmed 02:26, 21 March 2006 (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.