Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XXL (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, despite the best efforts of JzG to get it deleted. John Reaves (talk) 05:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

XXL (band)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Speedied once as a mix of non-notable and attack, still no evidence of notability. The band's website is on a free web host, and that is the sole source. This is a directory entry in a directory of Eurovision entrants. Wikipedia is not a directory. Guy (Help!) 14:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Keep this user has put deletion tags on many articles and gotten critisim for that. And tha tthe band has been in Eurovision Song Contest 2001 singing for Macedonia is notability enough.Just because its short doesnt mean its not notable. The song they sanged in eurovision even have its own page, then why should the band who singed it its own page?.--Matrix17 14:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * "Admin tags articles for deletion shock, pictures at eleven". Where are the non-trivial independent secondary sources about this band? Guy (Help!) 09:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * There's a book reference and a couple of web-links in the "references" and "external links" sections. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:A. One Night In Hackney 303 14:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Their song have even its on page 100% Te Ljubam 303 and JxG it just seem strange that the band singing the song should have one. am i not right?--Matrix17 14:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand - IMO reaching the Eurovision final is unusual enough to confer notability in and of itself (aside from anything else, guaranteeing a place on the top-selling compilation album that follows each ESC) - although I'd support a cull of those bands knocked out in the semi-finals. -  Irides centi   (talk to me!)  14:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * From what non-trivial independent secondary sources are we supposed to expand it? Guy (Help!) 09:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment: This discussion should be closed due to that JxG didnt even take the time to do the nomination properly.--Matrix17 14:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC) Comment First of all i have added a article from the world leading news site on eurovision about the gorup. and second none of yourr cliams make any sense. The group has sources, they ahve been in eurovision, they already have a page about their own song in the contest. So whats the problem.--Matrix17 15:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Primary notability criterion: have they been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial coverage in reliable secondary sources independent of the band? If yes, add references ot the article.  If no, out it goes as failing policies on verifiability, original research, neutrality and not being a directory.  Feel free to merge these invisible bands to a single article per Eurovision, and even leave a redirect behind.  Eurovision is notable.  Every band that has ever appeared in Eurovision, however... Guy (Help!) 15:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * They're notable for the nature of their failure on the contest, kind of a Macedonian, oh, what's that engineering guy from Cal who sang so badly on Idol? I've seen unkind references to them and comments about them over the years in places like Italian Vogue (maybe Spanish Cosmo?) and French newspapers--not sure, but European magazines.  There might be more information in Macedonian.  They're a bit of a European in-joke.  I don't know anything about them, really, but they are the sort of small bit of information people should be able to come to an web encyclopedia to find out what folks are talking about, as they are still mentioned years later, when other losers are not remembered.  I feel fairly certain that with some digging from a good editor a credible small article could be made up.  KP Botany 16:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - I see no reliable third party sources attributing claims of notability. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 15:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep They're notable enough, if not for reasons they would like to be noted. Still, Guy's points on the attack portion must be heeded, and this must be removed until and unless there are credible sources.  That many of us don't read Macedonian is no reason to delete the article.  I'll see if I can get someone to work on the article, though.  KP Botany 16:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Being an entrant in Eurovision is notable. Artw 16:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There are plenty of Eurovision entrants that, please!, are not notable enough for an entry in Wikipedia. There are plenty who never made another blip anywhere after the contest.  KP Botany 16:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, I disagree, any band which has been in Eurovision is notable enough for a short entry. Not that I'm familiar with the subject, but I expect we do have articles on every single American Idol contestant? Mackan 18:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The band is notable, and the article has room for improvement. Acalamari 16:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * From what non-trivial independent secondary sources are we supposed to improve it? Guy (Help!) 09:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand The band played on Eurovision, which definitely helps fulfill WP:BAND. I'm sure there are plenty of articles about the band, so let's keep and expand this puppy! Rockstar915 05:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * From what non-trivial independent secondary sources are we supposed to expand it? Guy (Help!) 09:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment regarding the potential attack-status of the article, I've now cited John Kennedy O'Connor's book in which he makes the (tongue-in-cheek, I believe, given the way in which he talks about a number of other acts) suggestion that the dancing was worked on to the exclusion of the vocals. Obviously that's "sourced POV" at best, but at the very least it's now sourced. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge Merge the song's article into this one. Strangnet 10:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Why so, may I ask? It might be just me, being outside Europe, but in my experience it's actually the song with the greater claim on notability and not the performer/s. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The song is always a subset of the performer/artist. But, I'm not religious about it - so the other way around is fine by me. The two should become one in the end, imho. --Strangnet 10:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * To tell you the truth, I'm a little bit surprised that this band fetched up with an article, since there's less than can be said about them than several other mid-table finishers over the years. Still, when in Rome. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment: offcourse the song should be inserted in the Band article. not the opposit it doesnt make any sense, if you want t read about a group you dont search for a song you search on the group name.--Matrix17 11:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Redirections take care of any such confusions if they would arise. --Strangnet 11:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, while it really should have at least one reliable source to confirm its notability, there are loads of articles like this which are not nominated for deletion, probably because more US users are familiar with them. Deleting this smells like US-centrism to me. It should however be noted that Matrix17 has canvassed this vfd on a bunch of user talkpages in a not entirely neutral manner, see . Mackan 18:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * So that's keep, despite having no sources, on the basis that I (a Brit) am US-centric? Odd. Guy (Help!) 08:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment: hahaha you are really funny mackan, you say a bunch of people? Name and reference to atleast 2 other people then? and i havent canvassed that person she has an own mind my suggestion desnt make her opinion final. Dont do bad talk about other people.what you doing is just silly nonsense--Matrix17 19:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * There are now sources, so we can move beyond that stage of the debate and actually discuss them. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 08:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment That's never an argument for keep, that other articles are just as worthless. Please, User:Mackan start nominating "the loads of other articles just like this" if you feel they should be deleted, rather than voting to keep this one just because the others are not put up for deletion.  This group should stay, because they do have an awkward sort of notoriety, mostly European, admitedly sad that Guy hasn't heard of them.  But if there are articles more deserving of being deleted, please propose them for deletion instead of arguing because they exist other crap should be allowed to exist.  Also, Matrix didn't canvas me, exactly who did he/she canvas?  I notify folks if I know they are interested in an article, and the science folks have a bulletin board which announces science topics up for deletion.  KP Botany 03:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Matrix 17, or Merge into the Eurovision 2000 article. Just H 02:38, 6 April 2007 (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.