Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ac acoustics

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'Aquatique [talk ] 04:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

Ac acoustics (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views) (delete ) – (View log)

Victory Parts (edit | talk | history  | protect | delete  | links | watch | logs | views)

Artist and album seem to fail WP:MUSIC, no sources found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete: The article has had very little done on it since 2006. Minor changes and clean up for NPOV and such. The "Critical acclaim and quotes" section only links to other Wikipedia articles, as do most of the other links. If valid/verifiable citations and references have not been found during the last two years they probably won't be anytime soon. Soundvisions1 (talk) 19:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
  • Comment – In 2006 Wikipedia was less strict about requiring sources. I'm finding some. Paul Erik ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
• (削除) Delete (削除ここまで) Keep band per WP:MUSIC#C1, but cut 'n paste merge the album, it still doesn't meet the guidelines.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 23:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete: They both fail WP:MUSIC. Schuym1 (talk) 00:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep: multiple links to sources evidencing the band's critical acclaim (thanks to Paul) are now included. I believe the inclusion on Seriously Scottish alone justifies retention within Wikipedia. Finally, much of the "peacock material" (sic) within my original submission has rightly been removed and the article's style notably improved. Furrypop (talk) 19:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
• The article's subject passes WP:MUSIC criterion #1, with reviews and other non-trivial mentions in major media such as The Guardian , The Scotsman , The Times , and Melody Maker , all now added to the article. Keep. Paul Erik ^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep Besides non-trivial mentions in the national press at their peak, they also recorded several sessions for John Peel and featured twice in his Festive Fifty - see artist page at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/johnpeel/artists/a/acacoustics/ Also, on a purely personal note, they're one of my favourite bands - not that it counts for much but there you go! SonicMidwife (talk) 12:57, 20 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]
• Keep now that sourcing has shown passing WP:Music. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:51, 21 October 2008 (UTC) [reply ]

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.