Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shift K3Y


 * 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) 00:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Shift K3Y

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Is there sufficient evidence of notability? &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Hitting #3 in the UK singles chart meets WP:MUSBIO criterion #2. There's media coverage in mainstream sources. Article is over-dependent on sources that don't meet WP:RS but could be improved. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep As per above comments. Notable musician Guyb123321 (talk) 19:28, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep As per above, reached number 3 on the UK official chart is definitely notable, sources available. CanadaOlympic989 (talk) 22:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:38, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:38, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Very much notable, a #3 single on the UK Singles Chart isn't an easy thing to achieve. -- DJUnBalanced 16:49, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep There are enough any references and WP:NOTE passes. Rinfoli   { *Di§cu$ with me"# } 18:03, 24 April 2014 (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.