Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duck sickness

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 Speedy Delete G11 (spam). Non admin closure. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 18:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duck sickness

Nominated for speedy, I declined it because they claim to have sold 50,000 albums. Probably should be deleted, but since it's borderline I am passing it on to centralized discussion. I have no vote. Ryan Delaney ^talk 08:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No sources, none available, and the cited web site doesn't even exist. Given that they're claiming to be "taking over the FM waves", this smells like a hoax - I'm hardly inclined to think that a band could receive significant airtime without having been mentioned somewhere. Zetawoof_(ζ) 09:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete G1 as Hoax Most likely a hoax. A google search for "Duck Sickness" and another one for "Duck Sickness Oregon" do not come up with any results for a band, just a bunch of veterinary websites. Their claimed website does not exist. There are no references stating anything about the "band". This obviously make untrue "Their debut album "thenastyrulerz" has sold 50 thousand copies in the first year.", as a band with this much exposure would be covered in the press. "Their names may not be released due to contract details of competing labels". Would that ever happen in the music industry? I highly doubt it. Delete as G1 speedy per G1. Kn Cv² 10:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as blatant hoax. It doesn't even make sense. Drawn Some (talk) 11:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a couple of clear assertions of notability, but no evidence to those claims. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 14:21, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Either a hoax or blatant vandalism. tedder (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete quack. blantant hoax = vandalism, tagged. Duffbeerforme (talk) 16:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. I'm willing to go A7 or just WP:SPAM because this is entirely a promotional article. Already tagged as a hoax. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 16:25, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. It is not that obvious a hoax, but it is still speedable as spam in its current state. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:28, 20 May 2009 (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.