Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lickets


 * 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.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 01:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

The Lickets

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

Non-notable band. Article appears largely promotional. References provided are not enough to prove notability. No major label, no significant airplay or charted songs. Speedy declined merely because the band released two albums. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

The band has charted on independent and college radio in the top 20 for last two albums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chalfantsandilands (talk • contribs) 18:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Proof, please. References. It's required. We have to be able to verify what you write. Moreover, the "charts" you have mentioned are merely for individual stations, and not well-known national or regional charts. That is not sufficient. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 19:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

According to wikipedia: "All Class C and B FM stations in the United States can be included. Class A and D FM stations should generally not have articles, but exceptions may be made if they have a large audience, such as stations for medium to large universities, or are notable for some other reason." All of the stations listed fulfill this criteria, and according to wikipedia's rules are notable. The link to this wikipedia article is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(TV_and_radio_stations)Chalfantsandilands (talk) 02:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Uh, this has to do with whether or not the stations themselves are notable enough for articles about them. It has absolutely, positively nothing to do with the notability of their airplay rotation or charts. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

All chart positions mentioned with the exception of KVRX, which has no archive, have been referenced with links to the radio stations sites.Chalfantsandilands (talk) 03:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Will try to assemble as much "proof" as possible but independent radio charts are largely compiled through CMJ. A paid service. And these stations are all extremely well known. You really seem to be trying hard on this one. Chalfantsandilands (talk) 19:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Is it possible there is a fundamentalist agenda in Realkyhick's nomination of this group for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chalfantsandilands (talk • contribs) 19:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: Personal attacks of the nature shown above are specifically prohibited. Moreover, I have no idea how any fundamentalist agenda, mine or anyone else's would have any bearing whatsoever on this matter. The musical group simply does not meet notability requirements, period. It is not signed to a recognized label, it has not had any songs to appear on any noteworthy chart (single-station charts do not qualify), and it has not achieved notability through any other means outside of their performance. I've nominated for deletion many, many bands and musicians of all genres for these very same reasons. Not every musician merits a Wikipedia article, because of policies that have been put in place here for quite some time. I strongly suggest that the original author (who never bothers to sign his/her comments) read the relevant policies before continuing, and to refrain from remarks of a personal nature that may result in him or her being blocked from editing. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 02:13, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It is immediately apparent from looking at the entry that the band meets criteria 1 from the notability guidelines. Link: notability requirements. It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.And according to the guidelines the entry only needs to fulfill this single criterion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chalfantsandilands (talk • contribs) 03:13, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Again, the charts for individual stations are useless as only more notable charts are recognized for Wikipedia. Only the Lost in E Minor and Garden of Earthly Delights links actually have verifiable mentions of the band, and the longer of the two is nothing more than a paragraph. Two of the references link to other Wikipedia article - Wikipedia is not self-referencing. On the whole, the list of references is very insufficient. At the risk of repeating myself, the band is not notable. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:10, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete The references provided do not establish notability. Arguments for notability based on independent radio station charts or one-paragraph [trivial] mentions seem to me to be misguided and outside the intent of the WP:MUSIC guidelines; the band does not satisfy WP:MUSIC or the general notability guideline. HeureusementIci (talk) 05:06, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

The Wire, The Fly, Skyscraper, and the Sound Projector are all significant publications distributed internationally. The band is notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.184.112 (talk) 05:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That would really depend on the scope of the coverage. Does anyone here have access to any of these issues?  -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 05:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I added to the article links both to the fly article, as well as the text of the review in the wire by Matthew Ingram/ Woebot. This article continues to meet criteria for inclusion in wikipedia. Mentioned on Simon Reynolds blog here: http://blissout.blogspot.com/2005/06/blog-post.html. He made the term post-rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.184.112 (talk) 05:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd be wary of using a blog as a source. -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 05:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I know just saying...Also just added links to the pdf of h magazine, as well as verifiable contents of the sound projector links. This entry continues to meet criteria 1.


 * No, it doesn't. The mentions max out at three paragraphs for the longest one, which doesn't qualify as non-trivial. Blogs are not considered reliable sources. (And would you please sign in and sign your posts, Chalfantsandilands?) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep They seem to be notable within their niche. I think it's worth including. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Also: Scans of Reviews in The Wire, The Sound Projector, and Skyscraper here:

http://img78.imageshack.us/my.php?image=thewireoutsidehq3.jpg http://img224.imageshack.us/my.php?image=thewireinsideql8.jpg http://img387.imageshack.us/my.php?image=thesoundprojectoroutsidko0.jpg http://img234.imageshack.us/my.php?image=thesoundprojectorinsidemv2.jpg http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=skyscraperinsideid5.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chalfantsandilands (talk • contribs) 06:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 09:27, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I would like to see more coverage, but The Wire and The Fly are good sources, and they've been played on national UK radio, and they've obviously got beyond the 'garage band' stage, so let's keep it.--Michig (talk) 21:03, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Subject meets minimum criteria for independent coverage, more sources would be welcome, and I assume with be added with time. -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 00:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep This article only needs clean-up/ regular editing; notability and sourcing is fine. -- Banj e b oi   12:35, 28 December 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.