Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Spurs


 * 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 previous consensus to Redirect was overturned by a consensus to Keep post a WP:HEY by User:7&6=thirteen (non-admin closure) Britishfinance (talk) 21:34, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

The Spurs

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The songs got onto the RPM Country Tracks charts, which does meet WP:NMUSIC criteria. However, coverage is sparse at best. "The Spurs" + "Blacktop Fever" turns up only Wikipedia mirrors and a Soundcloud upload, and the album is not listed on AllMusic or Discogs.

Among the few results their names turn up in RPM, I found only this:
 * This issue (page 23) least confirms that it was a husband-and-wife duo of Phil and Becky Holmes and is the only substantial coverage I could find. The blurb mentions "airplay overseas" which is not elaborated on whatsoever, and mentions a nomination at the "Big Country Awards" which do not appear notable.
 * This issue (page 12) mentions them passingly in the context of Don Grashey, a notable record producer who apparently established the label the duo was on, but notability is not inherited from rubbing elbows with more famous people.
 * This one (page 14) only reiterates the chart positions from a few pages up, and that the single is 100% Canadian content (important for those CanCon laws).

The only other two hits that aren't just the charts themselves are merely sidebar ads for the label which mention the duo and the single name, plus Don Grashey's name and the label. Again, not significant coverage.

Even doing "The Spurs" + "Becky Holmes" + "Phil Holmes" gives absolutely nothing that isn't from the pages of RPM. If it weren't for the fact that Phil posted the songs on Soundcloud, I would almost think this to be a copyright trap of some kind.

tl;dr: I think we've got another clear-cut case similar to Articles for deletion/Waycross (band) where the absolute lack of reliable sources outshines the fact that at least one criterion of WP:NMUSIC is met. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:20, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:20, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect the title to Spur (disambiguation). Sports teams with the name might be searched for with a preceding "The". bd2412  T 19:26, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets the criteria at WP:NMUSIC as mentioned by the nominator. In the case of Articles for deletion/Waycross (band) there was a clear place to redirect the article which is why the decision was made to not follow the normal policy. In this case, there is no place to redirect to, and blatantly ignoring the policy guideline sets a bad precedent.4meter4 (talk) 18:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * They may meet WP:NMUSIC, but there is literally zero sourcing. WP:NMUSIC is not set in stone. See Articles for deletion/Jet Black Stare as another example of an artist who had a charted single but was deleted anyway due to an utter lack of reliable sourcing. Also, a redirect would not make sense in this case as "The Spurs" is an ambiguous title as it could refer to San Antonio Spurs among other things. There is only one, trivial source that even so much as confirms who was in the band, which is far from WP:SIGCOV. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:20, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * You obviously didn't read my comment carefully as I said "there is no place to redirect to" and was not arguing for a redirect. I was pointing out why there was a viable alternative at AFD for Waycross (band); an alternative that does not exist in this case.4meter4 (talk) 01:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * You still haven't made a case as to why The Spurs should be kept. Yes, they meet WP:NMUSIC with a charted single, but as I illustrated above, sourcing is absolutely nil. Several acts can pass WP:NMUSIC but not WP:GNG, and this seems to be one of them. I merely highlighted Waycross as an example of that. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:06, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes I have. Here is a relevant Quote: this comment from Dodger67 about subject-specific notability guidelines: An SNG is by definition meant to (temporarily) lower the bar for subjects for which proving GNG compliance is difficult.4meter4 (talk) 17:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:43, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 09:51, 24 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as per rationale of nom. While WP:NMUSIC is technically met (if you AGF since the links are dead), NMUSIC also clearly states, "meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept". 's assessment of the available online coverage is pretty spot on. Since there doesn't appear to be any in-depth coverage to support WP:GNG, and there is no viable redirect target, delete seems to be the only route to go. After deletion, I think BD2412's idea of creating a redirect to the dab page has merit. Onel 5969  TT me 11:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 *  Redirect -, barring the addition of more sources, I propose redirecting the article here. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:08, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Jax 0677 or Keep. Deletion is not an option per subject specific notability guideline as I stated above. However, as there is little more to be added then the redirect offered by Jax 0677, a redirect would be a sensible editorial decision. The record of the article history however should be left intact in case better referencing later emerges. I struck my keep vote above.4meter4 (talk) 17:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * and Would you be okay with me moving the article to The Spurs (band) and then redirecting to 1999 in country music, then redirecting just "The Spurs" to Spur (disambiguation)? That way, if someone wants to re-create the article, its history will be held at The Spurs (band) while anyone typing in just "The Spurs" will find any of the other entitites that can be referred to as "The Spurs". Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:28, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good plan to me.4meter4 (talk) 00:58, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * and do you agree with my above proposal? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 06:19, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 *  Reply - Move the article to The Spurs (band) and then redirect to 1999 in country music. --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:23, 25 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Go with TPH's suggestion- I'd expect The Spurs to be either a disambig, or possibly a redirect to Tottenham Hotspur, not an obscure band article. Reyk YO! 06:56, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I suggest you make it The Spurs (Canadian band), If you google "The Spurs" it appears there were others sharing the name.  See for example Jenny Dont and the Spurs. This would solve the anticipated potential ambiguity problem.  7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 10:51, 25 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I have no objection to that. <b style="color: Maroon;">Reyk</b> <b style="color: Blue;">YO!</b> 11:09, 25 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep I have substantially improved the article, and sourced it with the available sources I could find. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 15:14, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * 7&6=thirteen: I still think that's pretty thin at best, especially considering those are literally all the sources Google could find and most of them are only chart positions or passing mentions. There seems to be a consensus to my above-mentioned suggestion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * For future reference, User:7&6=thirteen works seamlessly, and I think better.
 * Ten Pound Hammer, I understand your concerns.
 * I did not fault you for compliance with WP:Before, as there are no other references that I could find on line. And I really tried.  It is clear that you as the nominator tried, too; unlike many AFDs I've participated in.  So you deserve props for that.
 * I would submit that they were part of the scene, and the article as NOW constituted makes a case for their notability, albeit over an apparently limited time span. The article is now what it was when it was nominated for deletion.  Whether this changes things like WP:Hey, I leave for others to weigh.  WP:Before mandates we should take into account what the article could become.
 * But Canadian country artists are not really my bailiwick; although I think that there origin is a mitigating factor for the apparent lack of coverage. Cheers.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 18:03, 25 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets the notability requirement for bands. "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." We have the subject specific guidelines to avoid having to argue nonstop in AFDs about this and end up with random results whether the same thing is kept or deleted based on whatever random group of people show up and who closes it.   D r e a m Focus  02:10, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment Now meets WP:GNG WP:Artist and WP:NMUSIC <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 13:34, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:NSONG and WP:BAND Thanks to the work by 7&6. I looked at this article a week ago and had trouble getting motivated to seek out sources. The article is much improved. The rationale of Dream focus also rings true. I do not fault the nominator for the WP:BEFORE, this one was difficult Lightburst (talk) 14:32, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. WP:PRESERVE WP:ATD. More research is needed but 7&6=13 made a good start. Lightburst (talk) 18:24, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep or Redirect per Jax 0677. I think the improvements might be enough to keep it, but I'm not 100% sure. --Caldorwards4 (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think WP:HEY applies now, and a keep is now preferable over the redirect since I last contributed to this discussion.4meter4 (talk) 15:22, 5 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.