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. toyed with no consensus but the argument that the articled meets MUSIC#6 hasn't really been refuted and deletion arguments are based more on GNG then MUSIC Spartaz ^Humbug! 09:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Baxter (punk band)[edit]

The band has only released one full-length album, is signed to non-notable independent record labels, and has not had any of its songs chart on a major music chart. In addition, the band is not covered significantly in reliable sources. It fails WP:Notability (music) Tim meh 03:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete including the three albums which I added. No notability per WP:MUSIC besides an otherwise notable member. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Meets WP:BAND criterion #6, with two notable members. The Chicago Tribune mentions their connection to Rise Against; I added that source just now. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:MUSIC#C6. Esradekan Gibb ^"Klat" 10:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Those who said keep under criterion #6 of WP:BAND should note that Neil Hennessy may not be notable. I've done a Google News search and found no significant coverage of him. Timmeh 14:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Being a member of multiple notable bands, Neil Hennessy is notable enough for our guidelines. (And that is documented in independent sources.) I know, it's the difficulty with these sorts of music articles when they come to AfD—we're suddenly having to research the potential notability of multiple articles' subjects all at once. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - The sources you listed don't do much more than mention Hennessy, with three of four being Punknews.org articles. I think it may be wise to ignore the "two or more ensembles" criterion in this case; even though he is in at least two independently notable bands, it seems that he has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. An article on Hennessy likely wouldn't make it past stub class. Timmeh 17:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think he's sufficiently notable, as there are multiple brief but non-trivial mentions. There is also coverage of him in the Daily Herald (May 30, 2008. p. 5 and Jun 6, 2008. p. 5 – both articles talk about him being a member of The Lawrence Arms and of Smoking Popes). Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - I suggest you take a look at the closing rationale for a similar AFD I nominated here. I think King of Hearts makes a very good point in his closing explanation. Just because reliable sources mention someone in terms of their involvement in a notable band does not necessarily mean the member is independently notable. Tim meh 19:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        Yes, I did see that, and it is a reasonable position to take (as is your position), although I'm not sure why that one wouldn't have been closed as a "redirect". One difference, though, is that multiple third-party sources have made mention of the connections with these artists, which I believe was not the case with the related articles in that other AfD. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        I believe it wasn't closed as "redirect" because the band contained two members with articles. We'd be introducing bias if we redirected to only one or the other. You do have a good point about the sources, which makes me realize my case isn't rock solid. I'm sort of a deletionist, so maybe I'm biased when it comes to this, but I still believe the mentions of Hennessy are not significant enough to pass WP:N. Anyway, although we may differ in opinion on this particular case, you sure do make a good effort to rescue articles, and I applaud your good work. :) Tim meh 23:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 08:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I dont find the notable connection. WP:NOTADVOCATE. The artist referred to dont seem to quite reach up to notable so far. I did find one australian web news article reference. Tim McIlrath -article has lots of references, but mostly about gig dates, and do not really make for documentation on notable events, or musicians. Mindless lists of band members changing or tour and recording dates do not meet criteria for Wikipedia:Notability. Promo material belongs on other sites. Casimirpo (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:Music (C6), and has RS with sufficient notability for inclusion. Nja²⁴⁷ 07:53, 14 July 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.