Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TGT (group)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

TGT (group)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This group does not have any independent notability, and their album was never released. Normally I would merge it instead, but I wouldn't know whether to merge it to the Ginuwine, Tank or Tyrese article. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 16:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  19:03, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: insufficient independent 3rd party coverage, non-notable. JamesBurns (talk) 08:21, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  | Talk 00:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, no reliable coverage. A-Kartoffel (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Despite the group not having released an album, they received a fair amount of media coverage, including entire articles about the trio in the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Sentinel, and Jet. I've added six references just now. The article's subject meets the general notability guideline, or WP:BAND criterion #1, so I suggest keep. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 19:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a little better, but are any of those sources verifiable? I mean, they do all claim to come from magazines and newspapers that are years old and whose issues don't appear to be accessible via the internet. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 01:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * They're not available via the Internet. To "verify" them, one might have to resort to other means. :) Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 01:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ...Which once again points to WP:V. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 04:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I might be missing your point...? Sources do not have to be on the Internet to be considered appropriate reliable sources according to WP:V. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 04:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It would certainly help though. JamesBurns (talk) 05:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * With some more careful searching, I was able to find a few links to articles and have now added them. If either of you has questions about the Sentinel article, please let me know and I can look it up in my library's database again. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 15:11, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
 * In that case, I withdraw the nomination. THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 19:28, 14 April 2009 (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.