Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vayden


 * 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   delete. airplay doesn't an article make so the delete side has better policy based arguments Spartaz Humbug! 06:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Vayden

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Reason
 * Fails WP:BAND. I saw this article while on Page Patrol and its citations are as per my observation on its talkpage - not WP:RS and WP:V. It was WP:CSD'ed but on the talkpage, an editor stated this was "improvement over previous deletions" and that he would not oppose it at this AfD. If this improvement, it needs salt to go along with its failure to establish notability for a band. It uses blogs and what appears to be self-posted websites or ones without editorial oversight. --moreno oso (talk) 00:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:57, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete - and  represent coverage in local Phoenix media.  Everything else I could find that would be from a reliable source is just concert listings.  If there is some more coverage, then this would fall over to a keep for me. -- Whpq (talk) 16:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and  represent national add placements on fifteen different major radio stations, which should be considered alongside Whpq's previous links to local Phoenix media coverage. I am the article's original author, and also dispute moreno oso's above misquotations of my words. I had said I would not oppose this article's deletion if I was unable to provide proper citations within one week, and since I have done so, I now strongly oppose this article's deletion. MetalMilitiaESP (talk) 09:28, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak keep- I was on the fence on whether or not it should actually kept, but since a source has been added confirming the band being on XM, I'm convinced. Umbralcorax (talk) 03:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - as per MetalMilitiaESP. — Parent5446 ☯ ([ msg] email) 22:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. No substantial relaible independent sources. Proof of airplay is not proof of significance, many insignificant bands get some airplay. Notability is about being the primary subject of non-trivial coverage in reliable independent sources, and I'm not seeing that. That's probably why it's been deleted four times already. is a WP:SPA who edited the article before its deletion and then recreated and is responsible for most of its content, including removing speedy tags. Guy (Help!) 18:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I feel I should clarify things here. For one- I was the one who removed the speedy tag on this article, not the article creator (although they had placed the hangon tag). For another, being played on a major outlet, like XM, is an indicator of notability per WP:BAND criteria 11- "Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network. ". And lastly, I should point out that even though this had been speedy deleted before, this particular incarnation of the article was allowed to be re-created with permission from Deletion review/Log/2010 June 16 (which is honestly why I contested the speedy in the first place- they made an effort to follow the rules, and were told that their effort was sufficient to allow an article, and I felt that rewarding that with a speedy deletion was a bit of a WP:BITE when the creator seemed to be acting in good faith). Umbralcorax (talk) 19:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


 * delete - the only sources for content provided so far are local newspapers and blogs - nothing that shows any national or international importance. Also as already noted above, proof of airplay is not proof of notability: notability (see WP:N) means there is significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Airplay suggests you'd be able to find some decent national sources - so where are they? Hm? WP:SPA posting WP:SPAM sets off alarm bells. The article fails WP:HOLE: nothing in the article differentiates Vayden from the million other bands who try to put up Wikipedia articles on themselves. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 18:27, 4 July 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.