Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seven the Hardway


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:22, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Seven the Hardway

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

declined speedy. fails WP:BAND. nothing in gnews. LibStar (talk) 06:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep With all due respect, did you actually read WP:BAND before nominating? This meets criteria #6: "Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians". Tony MacAlpine, Virgil Donati and Mark Boals are apparently independently notable as they have wikipedia articles which have been around for several years without anybody trying to delete them. If you think they are not, please start separate AFDs for them. Yoenit (talk) 07:38, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * can we even verify their existence when the only source given is a blog? and I could find nothing in gnews? it seems no one in the media seems to take any interest in this group. does WP:GNG override WP:BAND ?LibStar (talk) 10:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe the official website of the group? Or if you think that is all fake, try the offical websites of the individual members: or  Yoenit (talk) 10:52, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * how about third party sources as per WP:RS? LibStar (talk) 11:17, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Which part of WP:RS would that be exactly? Primary sources like these can be used to verify something exists, they just don't do anything for notability. Yoenit (talk) 12:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

*Comment I think some independent verification WP:V of this group in a reliable source would be a good thing. Literally anything reliable and independent. I can see the argument for WP:BAND but some minimum standards should be maintained if we are to have an article on something. Oh and yes GNG and particularly verifiability do override BAND. If we cannot even verify that three notable musicians are in the band per a reliable independent source then we really should not have a separate article on it. Jbtscott (talk) 11:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * thanks Jbtscott, well said. LibStar (talk) 11:46, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * What exactly is your reasoning here? Do you believe this is all one big elaborate hoax? Or is your point that a band which fails the WP:GNG, but meets WP:BAND should not have an article? Either way, what about these, , ? Yoenit (talk) 12:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * BAND and most other sub notability guidelines were simply designed to be an easy reference to quickly establish notability. Although this is often forgotten as some rush to verify notability by any avenue. I think you have probably got enough independent sources there and I would be inclined to lean towards keep. Jbtscott (talk) 12:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: WP:V doesn't look like a big hurdle, WP:N will be the determining factor.  With bands like this, the sources can often include tons of oddball music websites (but better looking that blogs) that I have difficulty evaluating.  For this band google news led me to:  (Antimusic.com) and  (Hardrock.hu, in hungarian, has been used as a source for some articles on Hungarian wikipedia).  There are other sources too, see, e.g.,  (Guitar Jar review),  (Hardrockhaven.net review).  (Progressiveworld.net)--Milowent • talkblp-r  19:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We could take the sources to the reliable sources noticeboard. From my previous experience there I am pretty sure at least the gibson article and hardrockhaven are reliable sources for they are professional sites with an editorial staff. Between them there should be enough coverage to satisfy the WP:GNG, any other RS is a bonus. Yoenit (talk) 20:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Those two sources did show up under a google news search, but i've never known exactly how google picks what sources show up there vs. blogs or elsewhere. If those are reliable sources, there's enough notability for me.--Milowent • talkblp-r  20:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * keep music:6 Aisha9152 (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Comment from original article author: The article has now been updated with a bunch of references. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 15:44, 19 October 2010 (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.