Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quantazelle


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 03:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Quantazelle

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article about American electronic musician, music producer and founder of the subVariant music label. Speedy declined. Prodded. One of several deprodded w/o comment by anon except to assert right to do so. 273 Google hits. Not all relevant. Noting helpful at Allmusic. Does not meet WP:MUSIC. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  14:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, as I originally tagged it. Just a mere assertion of notability, when that assertion is obviously not valid, is not a reason to remove a speedy a go through prod and then AfD. No label, no reliable sources except XLR8R, just one album, lots of redlinks, simply not notable at all. Realkyhick 16:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * CommentNo, I the mere assertion of notability does remove it from WP:CSD. Debating that assertion's validity would be something to take up on the talk page of a prodded article, but another editor seemed to believe subject was sufficiently notable to de-prod. So I brought it here. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  18:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * And I think you for nominating it. We'll play the cards that are dealt. Realkyhick 00:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per comprehensive nomination. Assertion of notability does not appear to meet WP:MUSIC. This was not a speedy, Realkyhick. Process is important to the person whose article is being nominated. Rockpock  e  t  22:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: True. I guess I'm getting a bit cranky because of some anon editors de-prodding articles just because they can. Not much of an excuse, but it's the best I've got. Realkyhick 00:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I understand, and often unprodded articles (as you say, just because they can) will slip back under the radar. However, I had it watchlisted and would have taken it to AfD myself as part of the speedy review process, but Dlohcierekim very kindly beat me to it. Rockpock  e  t  00:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Glad to be of help. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  00:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:MUSIC. No sources and no real notability established. Seraphim  Whipp 10:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:MUSIC. Actually does look like a speedy to me, but no reason not to give it a full debate I guess. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, doesn't meet WP:MUSIC. What do you want to bet this gets re-re-re-created? Accounting4Taste 15:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per all above, especially nom. GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 21:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 05:40, 13 September 2007 (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.