Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Expendables


 * 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. Protonk (talk) 20:15, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The Expendables

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

There's no way I can see this band meeting Wikipedia's notability requirements for a band if the "notable" record label is a redlink. The band certainly doesn't meet WP:NOTABLE general notability guidelines, either, and lacks any reliable sources. Because of the claim of notability of the record label, I think this article passes the statement of importance test. Proposed deletion declined on the 5th day with no explanation or alteration to the article. &mdash;  X   S   G   16:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nominator recommends Delete for the above reasons.


 * Delete as per nomination. If notable, need information about the albums released and the tours the band has taken.  No information about this visible from a quick search.  Theseeker4 (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. A redlink doesn't mean the topic isn't notable. It just means that Wikipedia doesn't yet have an article on the topic. Here are several references about the record company: Google News archive search -- Eastmain (talk) 17:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:MUSIC. Even if Stoopid records is a "more important indie label", (note that the requirement here is different than notable), it still appears that The Expendables have only released one album with them, thus failing criterion 5's two album requirement.  And, since I can't find another notable band on Stoopid Records other than Slightly Stoopid, it probably doesn't qualify anyway. gnfnrf (talk) 23:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 20:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 20:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep – The band does meet the general notability guideline and thus it meets WP:MUSIC criterion #1. I've cleaned up the article and added seven references just now. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 22:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree that it's possible that this band may become notable, however the available references show that the band has a few fans in one small locale (Santa Cruz isn't large). If I saw links to articles in a wider variety of newspapers or even a mention of the band in Santa Cruz's largest newspaper, the Santa Cruz sentinel, I'd be convinced.  The best I can find is this, which may put me in the weak keep territory.  Let me ponder... &mdash;   X   S   G   22:44, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I've pondered. I found that the DVD was self-published and virtually un-distributed.  In looking on Amazon for any record of the DVD (which I couldn't find, but let me tell you... searching for "XXX Rated" was probably the Expendables' last laugh on me), I found that Amazon does sell their CDs, published by Mri Associated and Right Time Records.  I'm still on the delete side of things, but now I'm looking for more information about these labels... &mdash;   X   S   G   09:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Progress. Right Time Records seems non-notable and non-important, with only one listed artist, Krave.  Mri Associated is aka Megaforce Records, a label with several Wikipedia-notable bands, including Ministry's latest release.  Now, if only the Megaforce Records site acknowledged The Expendables' existence...  I'm still on delete, but if someone can show me a Megaforce press release for The Expendables, I'd go for keep.  &mdash;   X   S   G   10:04, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply – You wrote: the available references show that the band has a few fans in one small locale. I think I understand your concerns, but keep in mind that by a strict reading of WP:GNG or WP:MUSIC criterion #1, this article's subject does pass. Local sources are perfectly acceptable, as long as there is significant coverage and the coverage is independent of the article's subject. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 18:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mgm|(talk) 19:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep They appear to cleanly satisfy general notabiliy with multiple reliable sources, which makes them pass wp:music criteria 1.   D ENNIS B ROWN  (T) (C) 19:27, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Nice cleanup. It now meets the general notability standards with enough reliable sources. Mentions in different newspapers in multiple locales.  Royal broil  20:06, 16 November 2008 (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.