Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Organic Lawn Management (band) (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   delete. The Bushranger One ping only 19:07, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

The Organic Lawn Management (band)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Articles on this band have been speedy deleted on several occasions and another was deleted after an AfD in early 2011. I can't determine whether this article simply duplicates earlier versions, and it's been nearly two years, so I decided to bring it here. The reviews in the article do not seem reliable in terms of establishing notability, and I found no significant coverage in GNews or elsewhere for this band; just an official website and social networking sites (YouTube, Facebook, MySpace, last.fm, etc). Subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:BAND.  Gongshow  Talk 20:43, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I am also nominating the following related page because it too lacks sufficient coverage to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:NALBUMS:
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 20:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 20:52, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 20:52, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak delete This article fails WP:GNG. With a few more reliable sources, I believe this article could stand a chance in the future if written by someone who has the desire to make it decent.--Riverrunner123 (talk) 03:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

No apparent reason to delete. I believe that there seems to be no reason to delete this page. There are numerous pages present on Wikipedia which have little to no valid referencing, and viewing the references from this page it seems that the important ones are not just referencing the band's own site. Reviews have been written by people who work for actual music review sites, which to me seems a valid reason for keeping the page. If they're working hard and whoever wrote it isn't trying to break any rules, then it should stay. The fact that they have an album too, which seems to have had work put into it from people other than just themselves, to me, seems to mean that it isn't a run-of-the-mill group who are just trying to conjure up publicity. (I don't quite know how to get IP on here as I don't have a username). 15:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.55.34 (talk)
 * Regarding other pages with little or no valid referencing, they have no bearing on this article (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). And, as User:Peridon wrote in the previous AfD, if good references are out there, I welcome their inclusion.  Gongshow  Talk 17:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, surely it does have a bearing. If there are pages present on Wiki with no valid referencing they should not be allowed. That's the whole point of the site, to have a free, accurate encyclopaedia. The fact that this page does have some valid references should count in its favour. Just because one group of people haven't heard of them doesn't make it a valid reason for deletion (see []). People who read the Live Music Scene website will clearly have been exposed to them. And, re: the AfD in 2011, the page seems to now be more accurately written with more references and notability. 12:09, 15th September 2012, (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.55.34 (talk)

Delete - This article simply does not appear to assert the subject's importance as outlined by WP:MUSICBIO. -- WikHead (talk) 23:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.BennyHillbilly (talk) 08:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - I don't see how notability is met generally or specifically for bands. There is no significant coverage. -- Whpq (talk) 13:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

No apparent reason to delete Just another example of wikipedia moderators trying to exercise their power for little to no reason. Moronic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.238.122 (talk) 22:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Contrary to the assertion that there is "(n)o apparent reason to delete", the nomination statement articulates a clear reason. I get from the last AFD that this band has a loyal following.  However, that isn't the issue.  Reliable sources are needed.  -- Whpq (talk) 13:00, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - There is just not enough coverage for this band to meet the notability criteria. All but one of the reviews being presented as sources are from user-submitted review sites, and thus are not reliable.  There is one that is not, from "Live Music Scene", however, not only am I unsure of that site's reliability, it is still only a singular source, falling short of the multiple reliable sources needed.  Rorshacma (talk) 16:38, 20 September 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.