Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haus (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 delete. Kurykh (talk) 00:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Haus (Band)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The M Magazine article is an "interview" that is shorter than this deletion nomination and has no named author. The WhenTheHornBlows reference is a link to a page where you can hear the song. The Music Glue reference is another incredibly short no-author interview. I was able to find one other "interview" on them, for the third time with no named author, on Wonderland Magazine here. Three short "interviews" that could have been written and answered by the band themselves or by their manager and very likely fail to meet WP:I do not constitute a case for notability. KDS4444 (talk) 13:38, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @KDS4444: This looks like a good opportunity to apply WP:BEFORE element C.2 (If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.) Given that the article was created just two hours before your nomination. Gab4gab (talk) 15:09, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gab4gab: I understand. This is why I never nominate articles for deletion that are less than 30 minutes old. But I have yet to see any policies or guidelines or essays that specifically state how long an article should be allowed to exist before becoming fair game for a regular deletion nomination other than those which suggest that there should be no grace period at all (WP:NEWARTICLE) and those that say that certain kinds of speedy deletion should not take place within the first 10 or 15 minutes of article creation (WP:NPP, WP:CSD). Two hours seems more than fair to me, but how long would seem fair to you (given that this was done during a "new" page patrol)? KDS4444 (talk) 04:45, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@KDS4444: I agree that it's all very vague and pick your own wait period. Personally I'd tag the article for notability and come back the next day to see if the creator had come back with anything. But I understand that may be considered extreme caution. I usually work new pages from the other end of the queue >>And God bless you for that, I don't have the patience! KDS4444 (talk) 10:48, 2 May 2017 (UTC) << so I don't hit this issue myself. I appreciate you sharing your criteria & I'll dial back my too-soon alarm. Gab4gab (talk) 14:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. May become notable enough by the end of the year, but right now they've just released a handful of singles that haven't done much, and there's hardly any substantial coverage of the band. I found this from Clash but it doesn't convince me that an article is justified at this stage - their 'nationwide tour' appears to just be a series of gigs at a few small venues. --Michig (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:44, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:44, 5 May 2017 (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.