Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stone Free (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   delete. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 11:02, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Stone Free (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BAND. The coverage doesn't assert notability: And I couldn't find any other (reliable) sources, just Myspace/Youtube/etc. benzband ( talk ) 18:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * http://web.archive.org/web/20121006175322/http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=95411
 * http://web.archive.org/web/20080731132557/http://www.newagebd.com/2008/may/23/may23/xtra_inner6.html
 * http://web.archive.org/web/20090720080736/http://www.newagebd.com/2009/jul/10/jul10/xtra_also5.html
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep: The first link surely doesn't assert the notability, but in the second one, the band seems to be really the subject of the coverage! I'm not sure if it's enough though. -- Zayeem (talk) 16:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: - is subject of coverage/media. --BabbaQ (talk) 23:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article on the band doesn't demonstrate the required notability for a band; doesn't comprise the multiple reliable sources needed to verify it. The onus is really on the article to demonstrate notability - not the sources that are actually not even in the article. — Mel bourne Star ☆ talk 07:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 14:18, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran ( t  •  c ) 01:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, not just because others said the same but because I really am torn. The single source seems like it isn't enough, yet a hard rock band in a part of the world where most people are too poor to buy Western music CDs and where the musical tradition is really, really, really different from British/North American rock music does seem notable in and of itself. I say keep unless I see a stronger argument against it. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:53, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. So the only criteria of WP:BAND that the band can justifiably fulfill is point 1 or 7. Regarding point 1 (subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works ), we have three sources referencing the band (only one of which appears on the article page) and two of those sources are by the same publisher. The second publisher is similar to that of a university newspaper in presentation (with a small circulation to match). The article in the Daily Star is quite definitely a trivial article. It simply says... here's a cool band... which, rather like BBC Introducing's biography listings, isn't of all that much notability. Regarding point 7 of WP:BAND (most prominent of the local scene of a city), the external link to their facebook page shows only 700 likes. Face it. The band is a garage band. Charon123able (talk) 18:45, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As a full disclosure, Charon123able did leave a request on my talk page for me to review this discussion, which is within Charon123able's right as I did mention that a strong argument against keeping could sway me. And this is a strong argument, though given my own wishy-washiness about this issue, I don't think it would be balanced for me to push strongly either way. Henceforth, I would like to retract my support for a weak keep, but for the sake of keeping said balance I cannot replace it with more than a weak delete. Take that for what it is. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Non-notable cover band, fails WP:GNG and WP:NBAND. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 08:41, 18 April 2013 (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.