Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ROOM 94
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. The consensus is that this should be deleted, as there are no reliable sources to show that they meet the criteria for inclusion. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- ROOM 94 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Moderately successful band but no reliable sources to show that they satisfy the notability criteria at WP:BAND andy (talk) 00:12, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No evidence of substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources, therefore notability not demonstrated to Wikipedia standards. Dawn Bard (talk) 13:36, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. After request for WP:SPEEDY was declined, nominator proposed AFD the same day the article was created. Stubbleboy 16:30, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Nothing wrong with that. There are still no reliable sources, just things like announcements of minor gigs. Anyway, I prodded it first to give the author time to fix it but this was contested. In fact the author seems to have abandoned the article completely. andy (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 11:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Final relist for more comments... Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione Message 15:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Lacks coverage in coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 08:30, 27 January 2012 (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.