Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacrilege (NWOBHM)


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:45, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Sacrilege (NWOBHM)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completely unreferenced and very advertorially-toned articles about a band and two of its members. The band could potentially pass WP:NMUSIC if this were written and sourced properly, but they're not entitled to keep something that's written and sourced like this just because they exist — NMUSIC cannot be passed just by asserting that it's passed, but rather requires reliable sourcing which verifies the accuracy of the assertions. And the individual guitarists' WP:BLPs don't even make any notability claim at all that would entitle either of them to standalone articles as separate topics from the band, rather than just redirects. If the band article sees sufficient sourcing and tone cleanup before close, then I'm willing to withdraw this, but it has to be deleted if it stays looking like this — and the guitarists' articles need to be either redirected to the band article if that one's kept, or deleted as well if the band gets deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Update: Creator has started adding some "references" to the band, but they're primary sources and blogs rather than reliable source coverage in real media, so they don't improve the case at all. Bearcat (talk) 16:28, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  22:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  22:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete at best for now and restart later as WP:TNT or draft and userfy if needed, nothing else convincing with no solid signs of applicable notability. SwisterTwister   talk  07:32, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete all for lacking significant coverage in reliable sources. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:07, 11 March 2016 (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.