Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sasquatch (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   keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 20:33, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Sasquatch (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable group lacking non-trivial support. red dogsix (talk) 02:53, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 06:25, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 06:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Bio and three reviews at Allmusic, and a staff review from Sputnik Music . Looks borderline but I suspect that there is more coverage out there. --Michig (talk) 08:29, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep or weak keep I don't know what the guidelines are about Allmusic but I do know that they don't review just anyone. Correct me if I'm wrong but those reviews should count as sources. As a bonus, Sasquatch's label is one of the more important ones within their genre (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoner_rock). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paperpencils (talk • contribs) 12:08, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - here's a review from The Aquarian Weekly to go with the above sources. In total, the amount of coverage is not overwhelming, but in my view is just enough to meet WP:BAND.  Gongshow    talk  15:11, 2 April 2015 (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.