Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sun The Moon The Stars


 * 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 No consensus. with no prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) czar ♔   22:15, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

The Sun The Moon The Stars

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I prodded this and have been keeping an eye on it since. It's been much improved with references, which addresses one of my main concerns, but the subject still seems non-notable. The references all seem minor – blogs, fanzines, retailers – and the detail that's been added reinforces my opinion that it's a minor band – a pub band in UK terms – which falls well short of satisfying WP:NMUSIC. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 19:07, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  19:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - Cited sources include the formal announcing of the band's label signing and internationally distributed record release from the ALTERNATIVE PRESS, a major media outlet in music that does NOT cover "pub bands". The reason the page has been recently edited to fit Wikipedia's guidelines is because the person formerly active in maintaining it passed away some time ago, and I am now trying to save it before it is removed from the site. It is a work in progress, BUT sources cited include Punknews.org and Alternative Press among smaller blogs that reviewed the band's record, which happens to be available in UK shops. Thanks for your diligence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.160.236.22 (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC) —  69.160.236.22 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment - The band is also ranked on Amazon's National Music charts at #622,921 paid in albums, out of over 5 million releases, putting them in the top 20% and satisfying WP:NMUSIC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.160.236.22 (talk) 20:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * comment I don't see anything at WP:NMUSIC that suggests 622,921th in Amazon's sales ranking makes them notable. It mentions (#4) that a band is usually notable if they have a chart success in a national chart but that would be a top 30, top 40, top 100 sales position depending on the chart. I've formatted your comments too to make them stand out better.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 20:43, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - Amazon sales ranking definitely doesn't prove notability. But, the AltPress citation absolutely does. Jinkinson should have paid more attention to the diversity of the references listed on the page before posting his comment. Jinkinson claimed "the references all seem minor - blogs, fanzines, retailers", but at closer look there certainly are notable citations regarding the physical and digital distribution/release of their records from Punknews.org (one of the biggest punk news sites) as well as the Alternative Press, the largest alternative music publication in North America. The very first criteria listed under WP:NMUSIC "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources..." has clearly been satisfied. The source is reliable, not self-published by the band, and completely independent from the band. And no, I don't think AltPress would publish anything from a pub band, that's a no-brainer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.199.62.63 (talk) 23:18, 1 October 2014 (UTC) —  68.199.62.63 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment No I didn't, it was JohnBlackburne who said what you are attributing to me, 68.199.62.63. Jinkinson   talk to me  23:33, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 02:40, 2 October 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 00:49, 10 October 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 22:38, 18 October 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.