Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scardust


 * 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. Once you discount the policy-free canvased responses, the clear consensus is to delete this article. There is no consensus as to if the band's singer, Noa Gruman, would be a better topic for an article as suggested by gidonb. 's source table was a particularly strong argument. Guerillero Parlez Moi 09:17, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Scardust

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The article lacks any noteworthy information, and appears more like an advertisement than an encyclopedic article. Most of the information included is more or less a backlog of random concerts and festivals that the band have performed at over the past with trivial detail such as “the band's largest headline up to that point”, “a concert in Tel Aviv, which sold out”, and “the band performed their first concert at a venue in 17 months” and is heavily relied on self-published sources such as the band's official website (note: the website was inaccessible when I clicked in on my browser) and various YouTube videos posted by the band's account.

As per WP:NBAND, the band has no singles or albums that have charted, are not signed to a major record label, and have very little coverage in independent sources. Magatta (talk) 23:45, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Israel.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Rename to Noa Gruman per WP:ATD, WP:PRESERVE, WP:GNG, and WP:NBAND #1. While Scardust is just notable per WP:SIGCOV, WP:RS coverage, the lead singer has additional projects and is much more notable than the band. This resulted in a much longer article in the excellent Hewiki, that does have a brief article also on Scardust. I'm happy to rewrite the article to Gruman. Keep is only my second preference. gidonb (talk) 18:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete the band's article; create a new article for Noa Gruman if viable and let that one earn its keep in a separate discussion. The previous voter's suggestion is creative but it wouldn't work because this article is purely about Scardust and it must stand on that band's notability. The band has some softball interviews and bloggy promotional announcements in the underground metal press {,, ), but I don't think they reach the requirements for significant and reliable coverage. If there were an article about Noa Gruman, it can say that she is a member of Scardust in addition to her other activities, if those are notable in their own right. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 23:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the compliment! My suggestion is to have an article for the lead singer similar to Hewiki, making good use of more coverage than exists just for this band. gidonb (talk) 04:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  10:37, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I question your rationale for how the article looks "like an advertisement," as it looks like a completely neutral and normal article, to me, with a lot of "noteworthy" information. Even at that point, I think it would make more sense to remove the elements you feel are not neutral, rather than remove the whole article. Upon looking at the history of this article, it almost appears as if you're trying to spite the creators of this article, considering you successfully had one of the recent editors banned, in a discussion I think was completely unfair and unjust, but I digress. The "backlog of random festivals, etc." appears to be a comprehensive history of the band's live performances. The band is signed to M-Theory Audio, a label that is run under much of the same management as Century Media, one of the largest labels in metal. Sacrdust's album "Strangers" made several end-of-year lists by music aggregates such as Angry Metal Guy, Sonic Perspectives, and The Prog Archives. They're also playing at Wacken Open Air, one of the most prestigious metal festivals in the world, this year; so the band has quite a bit of notoriety, within its subgenre, actually... there's your "coverage in independent sources." The sources here are predominately, if not exclusively, Wikipedia-approved third-party sources and if you search them on any search engine, a plethora of results show up. There is nothing wrong with this article, and frankly, I think this deletion request is personal...(2601:44:C27F:83A0:45E3:4BD6:C9CF:C10B (talk) 00:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)) — 2601:44:C27F:83A0:45E3:4BD6:C9CF:C10B (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Angry Metal Guy is a blog, Sonic Perspectives is a fanzine that reviews albums after inviting bands to send them in, and Prog Archives is a fan-maintained site. None of those are independent media with professional journalistic and editorial standards, as required for reliable coverage in Wikipedia. In other words, Scardust has fans who run websites, but they have not been noticed by established music journalists. Meanwhile, if you choose to make an accusation about bad faith, take the opportunity to provide more evidence. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 01:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * *Strong Keep The article is completely neutral, per WP:Neutral Point of View; you're wrong about it "[appearing] like an advertisement," entirely. Most of the sources are independent -- don't exaggerate and claim the three or four self-published sources on the page, which appear alongside the independent sources, are "heavily replied" upon. A ridiculous accusation, I do say. Scardust is reliable per WP:SIGCOV and WP:RS, and should stay because of WP:PRESERVE, plain and simple. Several of the criteria of WP:NBAND are met, also, such as number 1 as per their recent Concrete Cages music video amongst other releases, number 4 as per their 2019 UK Tour including a show at the Ramblin Man Fair, and Dong Open Air and Wacken concerts in Germany later this year, amongst other performances (found cited in the Wikipeida article itself), and number 5 as per their the fact they are signed to M-Theory Audio, a "more important indie label" that manages several other notable artists such as Mordred and White Wizzard, amongst other criteria here. The article is properly sourced, as per WP:CITE and I believe it is very well constructed. --68.82.232.44 (talk) 20:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC) — 68.82.232.44 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  23:16, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Metal Storm has a page about the band, as does Spirit of Metal. Total Rock wrote about the band, including hurdy-gurdy player Patty Gurdy. Metal Insider interviewed them, Encyclopedia Metallum has a page about the band and also under their previous name, Somnia. Metal Temple reviewed the band as Somnia in 2014. Seems like enough activity and interest out there to include the band. Binksternet (talk) 14:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Enough already. It obviously isn't being voted for deletion. The majority of users and IPs have voted for keep. This is just a huge slap in the face to the editors. Give it a rest. There won't be much discussion, and by continuously renewing this deletion request, despite the majority consensus thus far, it just seems very petty. --2601:44:C27F:83A0:90FC:62D1:D898:82E (talk) 19:13, 15 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. Sources presented in the article and are a mix of primary, press releases, user exited, routine announcements. Nothing good for GNG. Touring lacks independent coverage for music#4. Only one album with m-theory so no meeting of music#5 (not that m-theory fit the criteria). duffbeerforme (talk) 07:18, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, the band and the lead singer Grubman have coverage that is significant.--CZUQZ (talk) 07:30, 20 June 2022 (UTC) — CZUQZ (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete. Fails WP:NBAND and WP:SIGCOV. See my source analysis below.4meter4 (talk) 22:07, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete- Given the debate here, I am seeing contradictions, rather than refutations of the central points made in nomination. I'm going to lay out the argument for deletion in the nom and respond to these points.
 * 1) Article lacks noteworthy information
 * 2) Reads like an advertisement
 * 3) Information is a backlog of random performances with trivial details
 * 4) Does not meet band.
 * Clearly points 1-3 are true. The information is a regurgitation of the bands past performances, there is little properly sourced discussion of the personal lives of members, the development of the group and its developmental milestones, nothing on style and composition of the music style. Turning to point 4, we get an answer as to why. The band is not sufficiently notable to have a full article. It the band was truly notable, it would have been covered more significantly by independent, reliable sources, which as the excellent source comparison table shows, is not the case. As the subject has also not had charted music or major label contracts, it does not meet WP:NBAND. None of the arguments here point specifically to how the criteria at WP:NBAND are met? From criteria 1-12, I have assessed the article subject against the criteria and see no evidence any are met. I am not persuaded by arguments of a rename either - it may well be so that Noa Gruman is notable, there seem to be a few hits but I didn't do a deep dive on here. The article would need to be fundamentally rewritten for a rename to be appropriate, and so it seems a more suitable option for this article to be deleted and an entirely new article on Gruman be drafted and submitted to AFC for assessment. MaxnaCarta (talk) 02:37, 22 June 2022 (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.