Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Showcase Showdown (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. Big Dom  10:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Showcase Showdown (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Prod declined just because the band has multiple albums. All of the releases were on non-notable labels; the band never charted a single or album; and sources are nonexistant. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 18:16, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Boing! said Zebedee did not say he thinks anything of the sort, so please do not misrepresent me. What Boing! said Zebedee said was "Declined PROD - given the claimed discography, I think this needs a proper AfD discussion" (and the PROD reason was nothing more than "A7 removed for the sake of removing an A7") -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Whatever. You're still being a process wonk. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 18:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * With your extensive experience here, I'd have thought you'd be aware of WP:AGF by now. There is a very good reason for having these proper deletion discussions - it is to alert the wider community of your concerns, and give people an opportunity to research the subject further and see if sufficient notability and reliable sources can be found. There is no need whatsoever to rush to delete an article like this. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:34, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note, TPH has now rewritten his nomination reason - I was replying to his original statement that "Boing! Said Zebedee thinks they assert notability" -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Does not meet any criterion on WP:NM and has no verifiable reliable sources. Wikipedia's musician notability standards have changed since this article was created in 2005.   —  Jeff G.  ツ  19:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Damaged Goods is not a 'non-notable label', even though the article on it is poor. A few brief items of coverage found: Allmusic, CMJ New Music Monthly, but it's looking a bit thin for supporting an article.--Michig (talk) 10:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Really not sure here. Their second album label, Damaged Goods, seems like a notable indie label, but that's just one album. Their first album label, Elevator Music, doesn't seem to be that notable - I can't see any otherwise notable artists in their catalog (I'm not all that clued up on the genre, so I might have missed some), though the album still appears to be widely available. There is some coverage of the band - there's the two things found by Michig, a couple of brief reviews of the first album, and there's a fairly lengthy quote from an interview with Carly Carioli from the Boston Phoenix on the Damaged Goods site, (but I really don't know the status of that newspaper, whether it's local or whatever). Altogether I think it comes close, but I'm not convinced there's enough to support an article here. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:26, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Sufficient career achievement to merit inclusion. This was an active band from the 1990s "Second Wave" of American punk rock. Although an "underground band," I don't doubt that there is third party coverage of them out there in the long grass in such publications as MRR, Jersey Beat, Flipside, Razorcake, Punk Planet, and so forth. Good discographic information would be lost without a corresponding benefit to the project. Carrite (talk) 05:52, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - There's another reference to the band here, which, though not huge, is a decent mention. I think they just meet the notability requirements. —Torchiest talkedits 17:40, 9 March 2011 (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.