Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terminal (band) (2nd nomination)

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. $Salvio$ ^{Let's talk about it!} 12:19, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Terminal (band)

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

Doesn't meet WP:MUSIC; their only album, while released by a semi-major label, did no more scrape the bottom of a minor chart, and they don't seem to have gotten any significant third-party write-ups (the current sources are all either first-party or barely worth mentionings). Also, they were previously nominated and approved for deletion, so I don't even know why it's still up. In any case, I say delete. Invisiboy42293 (talk) 20:56, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article differs substantially from whatever was up in 2005; this is not a repost and so is not eligible for a G4 (nor is the mere fact of a prior deletion reason to delete it again). The band, as the nominator notes, hit a Billboard chart, and even if they did not chart high on it, that is sufficient according to WP:MUSIC bullet 2. The group also meets WP:MUSIC bullet 6, as members have also played in Oh, Sleeper (most of Terminal later joined this band), Alive in Wild Paint, and Analog Rebellion. Finally, the nominator is mistaken about the sourcing; Terminal have a biography and a full review of their album on Allmusic and at Jesus Freak Hideout, and to this I've added coverage of the band's splintering on Alternative Press, as well as international coverage from Cross Rhythms and a retrospective from a staff writer at Absolute Punk who called the record "one of the great emo releases of the 00's". Chubbles (talk) 22:13, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Chubbles, for finding all these sources. Well done. Let's keep it in its improved state. -- Y not? 15:08, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. The Altpress piece (which is currently a dead link anyway) and the Absolute Punk piece are just short news articles, no more than a paragraph each, so I don't know if they meet bullet 1's requirement that they be "non-trivial" (album reviews don't either, by the way). The Allmusic bio is getting there, but it needs at least one more substantial write-up to fulfill bullet 1. And while their album did chart, it nevertheless charted pretty low on a relatively minor chart. That technically fulfills bullet 2, but it's not enough without sufficient press attention to back it up.

Right now they're teetering on the edge of notability, but I'm still gonna go with delete.--Invisiboy42293 (talk) 16:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll note that the Altpress piece is not a dead link; it displays on my end. Invisiboy's WP:HEY standard, I believe, is well beyond what WP:MUSIC actually requires of bands and musicians, both in terms of charting and coverage via album reviews (both generally regarded as acceptable indicators). Chubbles (talk) 21:36, 11 March 2014 (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.