Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Babies


 * 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) → TheSpecialUser TalkContributions* 01:05, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

The Babies

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Already previously deleted A7 (Band), this recreation fails to meet  WP:BAND. The supplied references to this underground band, although in notable newspapers, do not provide significant cover establishing notability for this unsigned, uncharted band. Other sources are basic review listings. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:28, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

The Babies are a nationally known band. They have toured nationally and internationally as a solo act and as an opener for such bands as: Guided By Voices, Wavves, Titus Andronicus (band), Best Coast, Times New Viking, Real Estate, and Yuck (band). They are clearly part of the indie rock establishment. They have been reviewed by Pitchfork media which is seen as a gatekeeper to notability in the independent music community. They are talked about in detail in notable News sources: The New York Times, New York Magazine and The New York Observer. Two members of The Babies are members of the bands Vivian Girls and Woods (band). The article for the band is justified.Thriley (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2012 (UTC)`
 * You are the creator of this article  and the onus is on  you  to provide those refences, and ones that  copmply  in  number, scope, and depth, with  WP:RS and WP:V in accordance with the criteria at  WP:BAND. The current scant sources do  not  do  it whether the band is well  known or not. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Keep WP:BAND says that a band is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself.. The Babies has articles about it in the New York Times, New York (magazine), and New York Observer, which are reliable sources. I despise garage band articles, but based on the references, this band is definitely notable. NJ Wine (talk) 00:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Undecided - Having been formed by members of three notable bands might very well count as notability. On the other hand, in its current state, the prose of the article simply do not assert any encyclopedic importance whatsoever. I could possibly sway towards a weak keep if only there was something solid in the article for the reader... without expecting them to follow a collection of external links to get the skinny. If the creator has a problem with actually writing this article, I don't see the point of keeping it. -- WikHead (talk) 02:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration.


 * Keep Clearly notable. I click links already in the article, such as the New York Times one, and I see enough mention of them to confirm they are notable.  I'll do some additional searches.   D r e a m Focus  08:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I found and added a quote from a major newspaper praising one of their albums. If anyone wants to sort through the Google news archive results that appear when the band's name and the name of one of their members appear, you'll surely find additional proof.  I think what has been found already is evidence enough.   D r e a m Focus  08:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - The band has received significant coverage in reliable sources, and appears to pass WP:GNG and criteria #1 of WP:BAND:
 * New York Press: Where The Babies Comes From
 * The New York Times: At CMJ, Some Get Spotlight; Others Get Lost in the Haze
 * Pitchfork Media article: Vivian Girls + Woods = The Babies
 * Pitchfork Media review: The Babies
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 10:30, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Metacritic reviews, Allmusic profile. Notable. - hahnch e n 11:38, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 14:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 14:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Coverage cited in the article demonstrates notability. --Michig (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep – A well-documented band, plenty of RS material is available. SteveStrummer (talk) 08:34, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Everything listed so far indicates that the band is notable enough for this article to remain on Wikipedia. Rcnj (talk) 17:04, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Has significant coverage in reliable sources - passes WP:GNG and WP:BAND. Deletion is absolutely not required here. → B  music  ian  07:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Band meets WP:MUSIC guidelines vis the coverage now cited in the article. — sparklism  hey! 09:49, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: When was the A7 deletion? If not very old, we got another editor to black mark.--Milowent • hasspoken  20:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It was on May 9th by User:Y.Thriley (talk) 02:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep—Notable via sources in the article and listed in this discussion. Liv it ⇑ Eh?/What? 14:27, 24 May 2012 (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.