Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tin Star Orphans


 * 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. L Faraone  23:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Tin Star Orphans

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable local band. Fails WP:BAND on all counts. No references given in the article meet criterion 1, most are SPS. All external links are either SPS, dead, or non-notable. Google search yields no independent references in the first two pages, then two lone non-notable ones on the third page. Neither the band nor their recordings are reviewed on allmusic. Additionally, article was created and primarily edited by a lone anonymous IP account. Editorial: I hate to do this, since I had a monster crush on their (probably notable) founder Zach Bennett when I was 10 and he was on Avonlea, but his band just isn't encyclopedic. Drasil (talk) 08:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 09:52, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep – Meets WP:BAND criterion #1 with coverage in multiple reliable independent sources, namely Now magazine here and here, in Vue Weekly here, Toro magazine here, Exclaim! magazine here, and in Chart here and here. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 02:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Since I'm new to AFD and significantly less experienced here than are you, maybe you can shed some light on this for me: is that really all it takes to qualify as notable? 100-word articles in local music newspapers seem to me to be profoundly slight media coverage. The way I read them, the music notability guidelines seem to be establishing the inclusion bar at bands that have at least reached the national level (particularly as per C2, C3, C4, C7). This band seems to be local to Toronto nearly exclusively, as demonstrated by your own evidence, and at least one of those articles seems to fail the first sub-criterion of C1 of WP:BAND. If this band is notable, at least three bands of which I've been a member would qualify for articles, not to mention hundreds of bands here in NYC who have managed blink-and-you'll-miss-it blurbs in The Village Voice, L Magazine, etc... is that right? --Drasil (talk) 14:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not the most notable of bands we document on Wikipedia; that's for sure. They don't have multiple chart hits and a lengthy article in Billboard describing the details of their history and so on. If there had been only a couple of brief blurbs in reliable sources, it would be dubious as to whether they would pass the notability bar for an article, but I think taken together there's enough here for what's typically acceptable at AfD. Of the sources I mentioned, I would say only Now is local to Toronto, though others might be published there. Vue Weekly is an Alberta publication writing about a Toronto band. Chart, Exclaim! and Toro are national in scope. (I haven't seen Toro previously discussed in AfD debates, but in the past Chart and Exclaim! have definitely been accepted as "national"-level.) Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 23:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep agree almost precisely with p. erik's evaluation. 86.42.74.117 (talk) 02:38, 20 May 2013 (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.