Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radio (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   delete. Cirt (talk) 22:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Radio (Band)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable band founded in 2007. Article contains no reliable sources. I did some searching on Google for sources for this band but couldn't find any. If anyone can any reliable sources for this article, I'll withdraw this deletion nom. Cunard (talk) 22:51, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

But here is a video of them ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-eldX9SRzo If you want more sources, i will try to find them... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhaskar20 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Band is still not too popular as it is a newly formed band... and it would be hard to find it in google because of the band's name "Radio" which is very common...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080910215034AADmTvo Bhaskar20 (talk) 23:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Here is a question asked in Yahoo Answers! on this band...


 * Comment:Here is their song on Imeem... http://www.imeem.com/bhaskarswaroop/music/lWTQfgpk/radio_musafir/ Bhaskar20 (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  18:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I would want to keep the Article - There is enough proof that the band exists but not enough to show that the band is popular. The band is 6 months old and had recently come to fame after being in a Bollywood hit film - Rock On!! But, I would still want the article to be kept. Whats the point of deleting the article when the page is going to be made again in a few months when RADIO would be a sensation. But, here is their Soundclick page, i guess - http://www.soundclick.com/members/default.cfm?member=radioreligion Nawal.1991 (talk) 04:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, here is the proof of the Radio being a band - http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=871828, now the deletion of the page would be injustified Nawal.1991 (talk) 04:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: The problem with the sources you provided about is that they are not reliable sources. I'm sure that the band Radio exists, but the question is: are they a notable band? The links you gave such as the Yahoo! Answers and YouTube are unreliable. Soundclick.com isn't a third-party source because it appears to be written by the band itself. Cunard (talk) 04:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: I completely agree with Cunard. The band is an upcoming band with potential to revolutionize the indian music, but atleast for now the band is not famous enough to have an article in Wikipedia. The article can be an exception case but it all depends on the Admin. We still have 3 days to give a newspaper link or something, but no user uploaded stuff. Bhaskar20 (talk) 04:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment:The band's page in Orkut has around 150 fans, which shows the popularity of the band... Will RADIO's page with 150 fans help?, And Cunard, whats with your userpage? It says that "Cunard is a douche", you should fix that...Nawal.1991 (talk) 23:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete:Contains no references to assert notability. --KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 13:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * strong delete. those arguing for keep so far seem to have misunderstood the rationale given for deletion. That the band exists is obvious, but it is not notable, and is unsourced so is also unverifiable. the only argument against that is to find reliable third party sources that have non-trivial coverage. as none can be found, this article fails poicy and must be deleted. If they get famous later, then sources will appear and the article can be re-written.Yobmod (talk) 13:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * delete : I too think that the page should be deleted as the band is not famous. The page will be made later after the band is famous enough to have a page in Wikipedia, well 2 days left before deletion... Bhaskar20 (talk) 23:18, 23 September 2008 (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.