Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shoes This High (band)


 * 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  13:07, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Shoes This High (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:BAND LibStar (talk) 13:39, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Online sourcing is looking thin but they definitely made waves in Wellington. This profile by a music charitable trust (Not your usual random blog) called them: "Arguably the most memorable of all the early Wellington post-punk bands." And if you click read more there is reams of material. This source is republication of a 1981 review. However an interesting snippet at the bottom of that page says: "I’m making it available simply for the record, because there was so little written about such groups at the time." Wading through the other the google hits gets them plenty of passing mentions mostly in relation to Heyward. So weather this all adds up to significant coverage, I'm undecided on. Mattg82 (talk) 18:40, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Week keep as the piece originally from a NZ paper The Evening Post is significant coverage and there are some reviews mentioned above and in the article, but more would help, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:10, 31 January 2020 (UTC) Changed to full keep explained later Atlantic306 (talk) 22:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:53, 4 February 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 22:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, no sourcing found, sources already present are trivial. And why do new article creators always append (band) at the end of article names even when they don't need to? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?)
 * Delete, albeit there seems to be related sources (to some extent), but as much as I see/reckon: such references might not be good enough to keep/support a page in Wikipedia; and factually it needs more related sources to be kept. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 10:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep I found this source which heavily implies that coverage existed in the The Dominion Post (Wellington) and the Evening Post. Not sure about the second one but the Dominion is one of NZ's top newspapers. I also found, which looks decent. And also this blog post which was apparently originally published on Othermusic.com (no longer available online, so they reposed it on a blog). Not sure if Othermusic would count or not as I don't know much about the site, but it does have some nice coverage. I also found , which also mentions coverage in "In Touch Magazine". I think in general there is enough indication that reliable sources exist (and others exist that aren't available online) and that we have enough sources to be able to flesh out a non-stub article. I didn't even do that thorough of a search, so there's probably a lot I missed. (Disclaimer: I live in Wellington NZ but haven't heard of the band before.) —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) (click me!)    19:09, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I suspect there is plenty of coverage of this band from the era they were active, but it will be in print newspapers and magazines that aren't easily available online. Based on what we have currently I'd say we are firmly at 'borderline', but giving the benefit of the doubt we should probably keep this. As a local Wellingtonian I'm wary of objectivity though., , , and ; thoughts? —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) (click me!)    21:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * So far all you've found is implications of coverage, not the actual coverage. For all we know the "coverage" could've just been a name drop that got overinflated to make the band seem more notable, absent the actual coverage's presence. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:53, 18 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep changing to full keep. There is proven significant coverage in The Evening Post and in this magazine article here press read more for the full article and it is highly likely that there is content in the Dominican post so there is enough coverage for it to stay, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:20, 18 February 2020 (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.