Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shades of Pale


 * 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. The Placebo Effect (talk) 04:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Shades of Pale

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Keep. When I first learned of this band's existence, I found I wanted to learn more. Thus, I went to the place I usually go when I want to learn about a rare band: wikipedia. Unfortunately, to my dismay, no such article existed at the time. So, I took the initiative and created one, so that future perusers of wikipedia would have access to that which I, at first, did not. The service I provided was one that should last forever. Allixpeeke (talk) 00:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to confirm, as it sure confused me for a moment, despite !voting "keep", Allixpeeke above is indeed the user who initiated this AfD..... ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, actually fails WP:MUSIC, only some self-released tapes. Punkmorten (talk) 10:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless some evidence of secondary coverage can be added or the cassettes were issued on a recognized label. I couldn't find anything significant on the web.--Michig (talk) 10:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 *  Delete – Could find no information.  Shoessss |  Chat  13:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Self-released cassette only titles, no professional reviews, only Google hit comes back to this article. Fails all notability requirements. - Hal Raglan (talk) 14:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Sorry... just can't seem to get my mind to cross the Notable line... --Pmedema (talk) 19:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Band appears to fail WP:MUSIC. Their casettes appear not to have been released on a notable label.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 19:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment...I am so utterly confused by the fact that this person would write the article a year ago and then take it to deletion today, despite not wanting it deleted... --SmashvilleBONK! 22:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it doesn't seem to make too much sense, I agree, but I think he/she was simply confused by the Proposal for Deletion tag that had been placed on the article a few days ago. Instead of simply removing the tag, he/she created the AFD.  I don't believe that was the actual intent, but since the subject does indeed seem to be lacking in notability and therefore, in my opinion, the article should be deleted, I think we should keep the AFD open.-Hal Raglan (talk) 22:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree...also, with all of the arguments being delete and based in policy, I don't think it can be withrdrawn. --SmashvilleBONK! 22:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Doesn't seem to meet WP:MUSIC criteria. I don't seem to find any reliable sources either. --SmashvilleBONK! 22:57, 27 December 2007 (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.


 * Because people are confused, allow me to make it clear. The reason I did this was because I did not want it to be deleted, and it would be (I think) auto-deleted in one week had I not.  This was the only thing I could do to save my beloved article.  Unfortunately, my noble attempt failed. Allixpeeke (talk) 22:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)