Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/She Dick


 * 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. -- Kurykh  02:20, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

She Dick

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Claim to fame is what???? Shoessss | Chat  14:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, seems to marginally pass WP:RS (and thus criterion #1 of WP:MUSIC). Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 14:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:BAND, WP:CRYSTAL, WP:SPAM. She gone. Realkyhick 18:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep TenPoundHammer is correct. The band barely meets criteria number one of WP:MUSIC. Dallas Observer and Dallas Voice qualify as WP:RS, so two features should meet the significant coverage guideline. Although I'd be a lot happier if they were covered at least once outside of their local area.Horrorshowj 20:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:MUSIC, barely, but meets. Carlossuarez46 05:03, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm terribly naive at times ... but aren't attempts to improve an article suppose to comes before an effort to delete them? I also invite folks to read the good faith effort the new editor has done to assert notability in a heated discussion on the talk pages. We have another case of a newby editor learning how to write a good article - let's avoid hitting them with a virtual rolled-up newspaper for their effort and find ways to support instead. Benjiboi 05:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete With only two references (I don't dare call YouTube a source), it fails WP:RS. It also fails WP:BAND because, to my knowledge, I haven't heard about them in media, WP:CRYSTAL and is probably WP:SPAM because the references are from alternative, no-name "news" sites. 69.158.57.45 21:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * CommentI added YouTube as that's where the videos are. Dallas Voice and Dallas Observer are hardly "no-name 'news' sites." Also, just because you have heard of them hardly means they are any less notable just that you likely are not in the Dallas area and/or simply didn't see that media coverage. Benjiboi 23:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - I can't see where it fails to be notable, verifiable, or any other requirement. SamBC 00:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - IMO, it does, in fact, pass WP:RS. The Dallas Voice and Observer do seem to be notable enough, although TPH is correct in his assertion that it's just barely. I also agree with Horrorshowj that coverage outside of the Dallas area would be great - to be truly notable, it seems that it would need at least a little coverage outside of the area - even from a "parent" group to the Voice and Observer, i.e. Village Voice Media or another paper from the National Gay Newspaper Guild. bwowen talk•contribs• review me please! 17:57, 29 July 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.