Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Was it the Walrus


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:25, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Was it the Walrus

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only two sources that are questionable. No real indication of notability. Also page was created by user that clearly represents the band. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:34, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails criteria as per WP:BAND -- HighKing ++ 11:33, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * This Page does site burlington post as a source. http://www.insidehalton.com/opinion-story/6806673-longtime-friends-reunite-to-bring-was-it-the-walrus-to-the-gta/ Vancerollins (talk) 13:38, 15 August 2016 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Vancerollins (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed.
 * The Burlington Post is a community weekly newspaper, which is not widely distributed enough (or archived anywhere that we could still access the content if its website ever died) to count as getting a topic over WP:GNG. It takes daily newspaper coverage, and/or music magazines on the order of Exclaim!, Rolling Stone, Spin or Paste, for a band to satisfy WP:NMUSIC. It would be acceptable for some supplementary confirmation of facts after GNG had already been passed by other sourcing, but it doesn't help bring the passage of GNG. Bearcat (talk) 18:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Makes no claim of notability that would pass WP:NMUSIC, and isn't sourced to anything like the kind of coverage it takes to pass WP:GNG. As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations platform where any band is entitled to an article just because they exist. Bearcat (talk) 18:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Do not delete It's been edited to improve neitral point of view Edited . Most indie bands on wikipedia will have someone close to the band creating their wikipidia page in order to keep content relevant. The Burlington Post is part of metroland media group media which is one of the biggest media groups in canada. This article improve Wikipedia's coverage of independent music. Carolinethivierge (talk) 13:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked sock account - striking through !vote. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:28, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Metroland papers cannot help get a topic over WP:GNG if they don't already have a strong claim to passing a specific notability criterion, because they're locally distributed community weekly newspapers with no broad extralocal readership and no public archives where we can retrieve the content again if the web link ever dies. They're acceptable for some confirmation of facts after the topic has already been Toronto Starred, Globe and Mailed, National Posted, Vancouver Sunned, Montreal Gazetted, CBCed and Exclaimed over GNG, but an article cannot be kept if a Metroland paper in the band's own hometown is the best you can do for sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 16:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Do not delete. Article seems to be written in a Neutral point of view.  Also This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia.  This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia.Vancerollins (talk) 13:46, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked sock account - striking through !vote. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:28, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * And what's their claim of notability that would pass WP:NMUSIC? Bearcat (talk) 16:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)


 * NOTE there is an ongoing investigation into three users who have voted to keep the article. At best appears to be a case of WP:MEAT. See: Sockpuppet investigations/Wasitthewalrus. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 15:26, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Followup note: both of the "Do not delete" votes were confirmed to be sock puppets of the original page creator. See: Sockpuppet investigations/Wasitthewalrus -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * NOTE I am one of the band members in was it the walrus I am not here to vote to delete the page or to keep the page. This was created by a person who works for the band (Vancerollins)as part of our management team.  If the community votes to keep the page, thank you.  If the community votes to delete the page I will understand.  All i request is, please do not penalize the band for future consideration.Jnorris walrus (talk) 19:56, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Trust me, there's nothing to worry about there. An AFD nomination is not a permanent ban on the band ever being notable enough for Wikipedia; in fact, we have lots of articles where an early version was deleted as not having established notability yet, but then six months or a year later something happened that wasn't true yet the first time (e.g. an unelected candidate for office winning the election, a band actually releasing their debut album and having a hit single, etc.), so a new article was allowed to be recreated again once that new thing, and the improved sourcing now available to support it, had gotten them over our inclusion rules. So yes, if and when something happens that changes the equation, an article can be created again at that time even if it gets deleted now. Bearcat (talk) 21:44, 16 August 2016 (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.