Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Young Werewolves (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   keep. Non-admin closure by Skomorokh  03:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The Young Werewolves
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Subject has no more assertion of notability than the last time it was deleted. Lacks verifiable second party sources and still has the same issues with bad citations and use of self published and unverifiable sources. neon white talk 19:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - It seems to meet criteria 1 in WP:MUSIC; Fangoria, Allmusic, Village Voice, etc. Not a strong keep but I hesitate to suggest it should be deleted. --  At am a chat 19:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. I see Fangoria, Allmusic, Village Voice, and other reliable sources among all the cruft. Criterion #1 of WP:MUSIC seems to be met. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!) 20:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Only allmusic has slight verifiablity (which is continually debated), the article nowhere establishes any notability and i don't think you can base notability solely on an entry on allmusic. Fangoria doesnt have any serious reputation and the source is a blog entry that amounts to no more than a press statement about an album release and according to guidelines these cannot be used to establish notability. The Village Voice source was one of the ones that could not be substantiated, no mention of the band can be found on their site. The title given in the citation is 'Voice Choices' which is the name of the 'gig guide'/listing section in the Village Voice this suggests that the source being referred to is a listing advertisement and therefore not appropriate to be used as evidence of notability. -- neon white talk 21:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Main "claims" to fame in WP:Reliable sources appear to be primarily of the same kind of one-liners and pass-throughs as in the 1st nomination, and appear to be better examples of the exceptions in WP:MUSIC criteria 1 rather than the positive qualification.  Village Voice mention, for example, appears to be the same one, still mysteriously missing from their website as well.  Fangoria mention is just a Fangoria.com blog entry repeating info from the band's MySpace page.  Still no major label distribution and no evidence of non-self-published works other than singles appearing on compilations. --Closeapple (talk) 01:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The band has at least two full reviews in magazines considered notable enough for their own articles, besides the allmusic reference and numerous less meaty mentions in other media. What amount of citation would be acceptable for the nominator to withdraw, or at least stop re-nominating? Gimme danger (talk) 06:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think record reviews are considered promotional in nature and not a good source for notability. -- neon white talk 13:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Why? They aren't promotional unless written by the band or associates. Having reviews written in major publications makes the information in the article verifiable, which is the purpose of the notability standard anyway. I don't see any information in this article which isn't verifiable. Gimme danger (talk) 14:04, 28 July 2008 (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.