Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Seal Cub Clubbing Club


 * 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. A number of sources were unearthed which showed some demonstration that WP:BAND was met through the GNG, although I believe this is still a borderline case. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The Seal Cub Clubbing Club

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable band, fails WP:BAND and tagged for notability for over two years. Coverage is almost all self-published, and even their own website is dead. Some gigs and some releases, but not on major labels. Minor radio play alleged, but not enough to make them notable. No notable members. Rodhull andemu  21:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Delete per WP:BAND. Christina Silverman (talk) 23:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable via sufficient coverage in reliable sources, e.g. Gigwise.com:, , City Life: , London Tourdates: , Liverpool Daily Post: , , Click Liverpool: , Drowned in Sound: , , Glasswerk: , strangeglue: , BBC: , musicOMH: , dailymusicguide: .--Michig (talk) 05:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep.  Q: What do a walrus and Tupperware have in common?   JBsupreme  ( talk ) ✄ ✄ ✄	 07:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No idea. OTOH, why is the above a valid !vote to keep? Rodhull  andemu  15:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Qwerp Qwertus  Talk  ツ   01:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. They've had some minor coverage, but seem to be a band that verged on success some time ago, and never realised it. The fact that the introduction qualifies their notability by "frequent comparisons" to two far more notable bands suggests to me that there's little in the way of correct assertion of notability. Furthermore, 3,000 listeners on Last.fm does not come across as a lot for a band around for such a significant period of time. Esteffect (talk) 01:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep – Michig demonstrates above that the band meets WP:BAND criterion #1, with non-trivial coverage in a variety of sources. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 04:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Some more coverage adding to Michig's, mostly on the trivial side but added up becomes something. ; ; ; and which includes the quote "give me a club and I'd happily do to them what they would do to a seal cub". duffbeerforme (talk) 11:03, 24 August 2010 (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.