Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The National Trust (band)


 * 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   delete. A new article may now be created on the other band using the same name.  SilkTork  *YES! 19:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The National Trust (band)

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

Article was de-proded, although apparently in error. As I noted in my prod2 there is a notable band by this name, however they are not the same band as described in the article. (See Allmusic article.) The band actually described has zero claim to notability that I could find. The article should be deleted and replace by an article about the otehr band if desired. ThaddeusB (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- ThaddeusB (talk) 23:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. The only coverage is in two local magazines. I also found a passing mention, but nothing more. Btw, their MySpace reports that they're on an indefinite hiatus. Fences and windows (talk) 01:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete As per nom, there is a notable band by this name, but this is not it. This band created its own label, unlike the other which is on a large indie label. (Before I realized the confusion, I was getting ready to !vote Keep.) Sources talk about their "freshman album."  Per the Tuscaloosa News article, their EP has been a "brisk seller locally," and is "planning a spring tour of the East Coast." Never charted, no national tour, no significant media coverage. No  real assertion of significance in the article. This band does not meet notability guidelines.Cheers,   Dloh  cierekim  22:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite to the notable band mentioned in the Allmusic page. They at least pass WP:MUSIC & WP:MUSIC. Where as these guys are lucky to be notable in their own lunch time.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 08:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment There is no actual content to keep since this is a complete different band. A deletion of the NN band doesn't prevent a creation of a page for the notable one. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * egg-zactly Dloh  cierekim
 * You're kidding right!!!!! So what you're telling me is if a band/album/song that shares the same name, is far more notable, and has sources and references to boot, shouldn't take over the page name???? I've seen that on many occasion during AfD discussions. I'd love for you to now dig up the Wikipedia guideline or policy that says that can't happen please.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 01:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No one is saying that it can't take over the page, just that the current, unrelated content should be deleted first. There is no reason for these revisions to stay in the page history and there certainly is no reason to keep the current content because of the possibility that it will be replaced by notable content. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ahhhhh, that explains thing a lot better. I see now. Although I'm 50/50 on whether the whole page actually needs to be deleted first. As a side note, I've already got the content mostly written for the new band to be dropped into place once this AfD gets wrapped up.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 02:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Is the other band "National Trust" or "The National Trust"? Seems to vary. Fences and windows (talk) 21:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Based on their own website, album covers and their record label it's The National Trust.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 22:22, 18 May 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.