Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molly (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. Missvain (talk) 00:56, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Molly (band)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable band GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:59, 7 November 2020 (UTC) Swedish band. There are no sources, just external links - the band's website and myspace page which do not provide notability. There is no article about them on the Swedish WP. We don't even know if they are still active or not. Though the first sentence of the article is the following: "Molly was a Swedish band...", but the infobox states "1989-?" so it's unknown if they have split up or not. But it's most likely they did, as they haven't seem to made any waves whatsoever. At least I haven't found anything about them. Their name makes searching difficult, so I looked up their albums. All I found were some retail sites, youtube videos and one album review on a blog. That's it. The rest of the results are the words separately. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have two full albums on a well-known indie label. That should be enough to establish notability. // Liftarn (talk) 15:33, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liftarn: In part, yes. But the sourcing is more important. And that is abysmal, and I couldn't find any reliable sources. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 16:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, feel free to change the tagging to {{refimprove}} then. // Liftarn (talk) 06:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liftarn: Okay, but I have not found any reliable sources. If I would just tag it with {{refimprove}}, the article would still sit here without any reliable references. I know that since I have seen a lot of band articles in that state. That's why I brought this band to AfD, to see whether anyone else has found any RS. If there are reliable sources, I just put them in and we're done. Notability is proven. Tagging with {{refimprove}} does not have that much an effect, like I said, I have seen band articles that has been tagged as such for 5-10, maybe 12 years now. And as of now, it hasn't been changed. I can't name you any examples since there are lots of band articles on WP. Okay, I can tell you one. A few months ago I nominated the article of the band Satariel for deletion. It has been tagged with refimprove since 2008. The sourcing was abysmal in that one as well, and I could barely find any RS. But then, thanks to the AfD, notability was finally proven thanks to reliable sources. So that's why I prefer to bring potentially non-notable stuff to Afd instead of just tagging it with refimprove. We can talk about it here whether it's notable or not. I don't necessarily want the article to be deleted, just to talk about whether it's notable or not. Regards, GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 08:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see I have started, but with a band name like that googling is a bit difficult. // Liftarn (talk) 16:56, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liftarn: Yeah, I have mentioned that too. They have a simple name, so searching "molly band" will result in lots of different stuff. That's why I also included the titles of their albums during a search, to specify I am looking for the Swedish band. And all I found the things I already mentioned above. And they are not reliable. Regards, GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 06:22, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did find some in SMDB that should be reliable. And a review of Raj Raj from the magazine Terrorpop. // Liftarn (talk) 13:26, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liftarn: I have never heard of any of these magazines. Google search did not return them either. Can you please post them here? GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 13:43, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SMDB is not a magazine, but a media catalogue at the National Library of Sweden. It's used to show that Molly did indeed got published by Sista bussen and thus are notable according to Wikipedia standards. Terrorpop was a Swedish music magazine in the 90s.[1] Some articles are online at http://www.blaskoteket.se/tidningar/terrorpop/ Others can be bought, [2][3][4] // Liftarn (talk) 14:05, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They sound reliable (especially the first one). I will take a look. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These are just shop links where you can buy this magazine. Can you please post the articles that talk about Molly specifically? Thank you. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:39, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the article, but http://www.blaskoteket.se/artiklar/terrorpop/nr-03-1994/molly-raj-raj/ // Liftarn (talk) 16:45, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I have already found this (during a Google search)! That's what I dismissed as an "album review on a blog". I had no idea Terrorpop was a magazine. The name of the magazine, its look and feel, and the style of the review made me think it's a blog or fanzine. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:03, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was a magazine, but the blog republishes some of the articles. // Liftarn (talk) 11:24, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And what about SMDB? GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 16:12, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SMDB (Svensk mediadatabas) is "a search service for the audiovisual collections at the National Library of Sweden (KB). The database contains information about TV, radio, video, movies presented in theaters, CDs, and multimedia.". I considered it a reliable source to show that Molly had their two albums released on an important indie label so they fulfil the requirements of WP:BAND. ("Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable).". // Liftarn (talk) 07:08, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Although I have never heard of "Sista Bussen", that doesn't count for anything since according to the article they have been around since 1978. There are no reliable sources in that article either, might I add, just the official site of the label. The svwiki article doesn't even contain that. So I must admit I have doubts about that label's notability too. But google might return something, who knows, maybe there are reliable sources about the label. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 08:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia defines an important indie label as "a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable". Sista bussen has been around since 1978 so that's more than a few years and they have published Freddie Wadling, Köttgrottorna, Gudibrallan, Stefan Sundström, Leather Nun and so on so they fulfil the second requirement as well. Btw, it feels like you're moving the goalposts. // Liftarn (talk) 15:34, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"I am moving the goalposts"? What's that supposed to mean? Sorry, I'm Hungarian, I don't know the meaning of every phrase. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 08:18, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first you asked for sources for Molly being notable and when I gave them you switched to asking for sources that Sista bussen is notable. Moving the goalposts // Liftarn (talk) 14:42, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not much consensus here so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 07:12, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability per Wikipedia guidelines (WP:BAND) established by reliable sources ("Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels"). Sista Bussen is an important indie label according to Wikipedia standards ("label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable"). // Liftarn (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete To the contrary, none of the sources in the article nor the extensive discussion above demonstrate notability under either the WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eggishorn: Thank you! Finally! I was right about this band being non-notable!

GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's notable according to Wikipedia rules. It's not the same as you need to have heard of it. // Liftarn (talk) 06:50, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:45, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Come on! I don't base an AfD on the reason "I have never heard of it". I'm just saying it but it's not my primary reason! That would be stupid! This band may be popular or known in the underground, but it's not notable for WP! End of story! GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 09:53, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's the only argument you have left. I have conclusively proven that they are notable per WP:BAND and that you don't like it is is little relevance. // Liftarn (talk) 07:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I think it would be time to close this. Whether it stays or not, it has been sitting here since Nov 7. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 09:55, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it fails WP:MUSICBIO Samat lib (talk) 00:54, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect. It fulfils point 5. // Liftarn (talk) 06:45, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liftarn:, how so? Making claims that an article subject fits some notability criteria should be supported by evidence. The albums in the article are circular links so that doesn't show evidence of ... two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels... Searching on Discogs shows that the two albums were released by Sista Bussen, and your article on that label itself shows notability issues. The definition of "one of the more important indie labels" includes having promoted well-known acts and of the nine bands you listed for Sista Bussen, only four are blue links and only one seems to have released a significant portion of their work on Sista Bussen. The claim of released two or more albums on a significant label is not sustained by the evidence available. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:44, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BAND says what is judged as notability ("Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels"). Sista Bussen is an important indie label according to Wikipedia standards ("label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable"). So we have established that Molly is a notable band. Now the goalposts have moved. I have given reliable sources for that Molly indeed are published by Sista Bussen (for instance SMDB, Svensk mediedatabas). // Liftarn (talk) 14:20, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liftarn:, you are claiming moving goalposts when they are in exactly the same place. Look again. I quoted the exact same standard and explained that in no way, shape, or form, has it been demonstrated that Sista Bussen is an important indie label. I even stated that I found independently Sista Bussen as the record label. Sista Bussen shows no sign of being a qualifying label under WP:BAND. You have time and time again claimed to have "established" Molly's notability when you have failed to back that claim up with evidence. Every editor who creates an article is naturally defensive when that article is nominated for deletion but please at least try to read and respond to what is actually being stated. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:20, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of Molly is established per WP:BAND ("Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels"). Now the goalposts have moved on to target Sista Bussen instead. Sista Bussen is notable as well ("label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable") so now the goalpost have moved to that there isn't enough sourcing for Sista Bussen. So what started out as a notability issue for a band is now a question about reliable sources for a label. That's what I call moving goalposts. // Liftarn (talk) 08:06, 2 December 2020 (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.