Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The alice rose


 * 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. Sourced coverage of the band has been proven, and there is no agreement as to whether or not said coverage is reliable or significant. Skomorokh 22:00, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

The alice rose

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Barely passes WP:CSD. Non-notable MySpace/garage/local band from Austin, TX. Fails WP:MUSIC Was prod/prod2'd, but removed by author. Google only turns up local stuff and their MySpace profile. → javért breakaway 02:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Only one reliable source. Notability is established by multiple reliable sources. Myspace bands are not notable. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 03:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. McMarcoP (talk) 10:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per this, this, and this. Joe Chill (talk) 23:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep: : Per this, this (some national-level press), and this. The Alice Rose is far more than a local Austin phenomenon, with national coverage from NPR and a song on a movie soundtrack - Toby Wilkins' indie film "Splinter"  (NY Times film credits), Toby Wilkins' blog reference here  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.210.225.242 (talk) 18:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC) — 216.210.225.242 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete. Fails WP:MUSICBIO. A mention on the sountrack of a small indie film (spawning a listing in the NYT) doesn't cut it. Never charted. Not much in the way of significant coverage in reliable sources. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep: : I looked up the film Splinter and it was a Hollywood movie with a legitimate producer and companies behind it. I also searched for "The Alice Rose" on Google, and articles from USA Today, National Public Radio, and The Onion all have mention of the music group "The Alice Rose." Also on the Google search, there are 338 legitimate links to the same band as of Sept. 1, 3:22p.m. EST. I vote to keep this entry. Jeanniekiyoko (talk • contribs) 19:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC) (talk) — Jeanniekiyoko (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 14:17, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: :Per NPR, Live Music Capitol Magazine, Amplifier Magazine, South By Southwest web site, St. Louis Riverfront Times, Relix Magazine, Splinter movie web site, USA Today, Absolute Powerpop site  (talk) Luphf — Luphf (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak delete Not really seeing any significant coverage in national sources. The NPR blip is hardly significant coverage, and everything else that isn't local seems to be trivial. If any real evidence of notability were available, or the band passed WP:BAND would definately vote keep, but as it is, seems to fall on the delete side of things. The   Seeker 4   Talk  19:34, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * added comment: the additions by two accounts with no other contributions voting to keep spurs me to put less weight on those keep votes. The   Seeker 4   Talk  19:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are a fair number of reviews for one of the band's albums, but I'm wondering on which points they might possibly pass WP:BAND. I agree with Seeker 4  that the presence of the three single purpose accounts are making it more difficult for me to lean towards their recommendation. Location (talk) 05:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I hope my comments and the views of other single purpose accounts are not somehow considered less important. I believe the band passes on the notability criterion via Criterion #1 -- "Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable." The band has garnered press on USA Today, National Public Radio, The Austin Chronicle, The Austin American Statesman, The San Antonio Express News, The Austin American Statesman, Austin Monthly, The Riverfront Times (out of St. Louis),Pop Culture Press and The Onion A.V. Club (Austin). These are all verifiable sources and do not fit the description of "trivial". Also, keep in mind that Austin is considered by many to be the "Live Music Capitol of the World" and is not an easy place to make a name as a band. This band has managed to develop what appears to be a strong local notoriety.Singleuser (talk) 19:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not convinced that the coverage of this band is significant. Looking at the two big name sources: The bit in NPR is a five sentence review of one song and the mention in USA Today links back to a two sentence "Who's playing" blurb in austin360.com .  Location (talk) 20:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I would say the coverage of this band is significant. I'm basing that on the metric of circulation for each publication in which the band has been mentioned. The San Antonio Express News has a circulation of 236,918 daily and 333,902 Sunday. The Austin American Statesman has a circulation of 173,527 daily and 215,984 Sunday. Relix Magazine has a circulation of 102,000. The Riverfront Times has a circulation of 85,308 weekly. The Austin Chronicle has a circulation of 89,834 weekly. Is there a metric for the number of sentences that make a review significant? Has a criterion been created for that? Maybe that should be considered. Singleuser (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC) — Singleuser (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * 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.