Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trash Talk (band)


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 23:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Trash Talk (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails: WP:MUSIC and WP:BAND WP:BEFORE was considered and reviewed prior to this debate nomination. Since the CSD tag was summarily removed without article improvement or prior edits, it is more appropriate to bring this article to a AfD for full community consensus. Dubious edits to another article led me to this band. They are Sacramento based but yet have not received reliable press from any of the local major newspapers to include the Sacramento Bee. Had this band done half the accomplishments claimed like their Chicago and European tour, there should have been mention in local Chicago or Japanese press, of which there is none, and present in the article. I live in the Sacramento area, am a contributing WP California member and totally unfamiliar with this group. Checking other local sources I know online and private which reveal no verifiable knowledge of the group which is astonishing given their "accomplishments". The present citations to this article come from websites that are unregulated and where self-publishing is evident. --moreno oso (talk) 11:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I removed the speedy tag because it was inappropriate. Before this was even speedy-tagged the article already contained references from Rolling Stone and Spin magazine - not in-depth coverage but enough to make speedy-deletion inappropriate. WP:BEFORE involves looking for alternatives for deletion, and at least making some effort to find coverage, before bringing an article to AFD. Had you searched for sources you may have found, within the first few pages of Google results, coverage from Pitchfork Media, the BBC, The Guardian, Drowned in Sound, and again, Stereogum, BBC again, and Rock Sound . See also Metacritic - reviews from Q Magazine, NME, Absolutepunk.com.--Michig (talk) 17:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per Michig. Joe Chill (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Eek. That's a mountain of non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. I'm frankly not sure how the nominator comes to the conclusions they come to, and if WP:BEFORE was considered I'd recommend trying Google as part of your due diligence next time. I would suggest withdrawing the nomination -- I just randomly clicked on two of the sources Mich links (The Guardian, BBC) and either of them are enough to let this band plainly pass any notability concerns, let alone verifiability ones. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  20:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 23 June 2010 (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.