Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sam Willows


 * 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. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 01:23, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The Sam Willows

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The band do not appear to be famous in Singapore, and the article does not state their notability in neutral terms. They do not meet the criteria under Too soon and Entertainer - no 'significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions', lacks a 'large fan base or a significant "cult" following', and have not 'made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment'. I am also concerned about the connection between the original author of this page and the band-research seems to suggest the original author is the band's website designer. --Paul 1953 (talk) 14:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Other issues of concern are the substantial lack of citations and references outside of the band's website and iTunes profile. Text added after the speedy deletion notice did not improve the article's quality, in my opinion. The rather large gap between my edit and the last one is also telling of their fledgling status. I am considering speedy deletion. --Paul 1953 (talk) 16:31, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * In the light of the revised Terms of Use regarding paid editing, I believe there is a stronger case for deletion. This is assuming that my hypothesis (see above) is right. Paul 1953 (talk) 10:44, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose: The Sam Willows is one of the most established singers from Singapore, and they are popular, not what you think. "Glasshouse" charted in the 987FM Top 100 Countdown of 2013, despite the fact that it did not enter the local chart. Nahnah4  |  Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here!  |  No Editcountitis!  08:05, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Relisting comment: AfD wasn't created properly--reformatting and adding to today's log.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Finngall  talk  05:31, 1 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 1 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - I don't think the 987Film chart mentioned above is an official for Singaporean music, so it can't be used as a claim to notability. With that said, a search revealed quite a number of interviews from reliable sources, such as one from TODAYonline and The Republican Post, so WP:N is met. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:31, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Quick google finds an article in TODAYonline, plus this in Noise11 about them collaborating with Steve Lillywhite. It also says they've performed at SXSW (supported by this) and Canadian Music Week. Some other news coverage on them includes in the Strait's Times, Yahoo Entertainment, Stuff Magazine, Republican Post, and they appear in a Channel 5 tv show as seen here. Their EP is presently No 62 on iTunes Singapore, a year after it was released. see here. I also found this from India Times which mentions in passing they performed at the 2013 Singapore Gran Prix and they were supporting act for Pete Murray's Singapore concert per this.  JTdale   Talk 12:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. From my brief search and looking at what JTdale found above, there is certainly significant coverage of this band in multiple verifiable reliable sources independent of the subject itself, and therefore passes the very basic of notability guidelines.  This article merely needs cleanup for neutrality and manual of style, which I will try and help with going forward.  Cheers.  ♫ Cricket02  (talk) 15:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As another note, this band is also signed for distribution with Warner Brothers Music as evidenced by their AllMusic profile, which passes music notability guidelines as well. ♫ Cricket02  (talk) 17:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned up the article as best I could with the short time I had available to do so today. This is probably the most ridiculous deletion nom I have ever seen.  Had the nominator done just a few minutes of research without prejudgement, maintenance tags could have been added, and a lot of our time as reviewers would have been saved. On the other hand, the article did get somewhat improved in response to this nom, so that may be the only plus to this nom. I have added it to my watchlist and will be very happy to further help with improvements in the future.  ♫ Cricket02  (talk) 18:03, 9 July 2014 (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.