Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Flaming Mussolinis (2nd nomination)


 * 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. But this time it would be good if someone could improve the article. Davewild (talk) 12:47, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The Flaming Mussolinis
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability in six years. Dweller (talk) 13:23, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  15:08, 22 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per the sources identified by in the previous AfD, including major label albums, a charting single and a substantive album review. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I missed that there'd been a previous AfD. Those sources really ought to be in the article. --Dweller (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Looking at the coverages mentioned in the first AFD I couldn't find anything outside the realm of Routine. a music review website reviewing music is no more notable than a dead persons obituary. the secondaries I found and those listed are all routine coverage nothing out of the ordinary coverage you would expect. Bryce Carmony (talk) 02:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per the notability demonstrated in the last AFD. Yes, the article lacks sources, but that is not a reason to delete. — sparklism hey! 13:17, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not that the article lacks references it's that the topic lacks sources that is the problem.Bryce Carmony (talk) 19:11, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per my reasoning in the first AfD. --Michig (talk) 07:30, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, passes multiple points of WP:BAND, per previous AfD. Cavarrone 09:14, 30 April 2015 (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.