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. WP:BAND #6 states: "an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians (emphasis added)." I take that to mean that the members' notability cannot depend on another band. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Organ Thieves[edit]

The band has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. In addition, they've only been active since last year and have released one self-released EP, having not been signed by any record label. The band fails the music notability guideline. Tim meh 17:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:MUSIC The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Does not fail WP:MUSIC because of multiple members with their own article. (WP:BAND#6). ZabMilenko^{How am I driving?} 08:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That criterion is referring to independently notable musicians. Just because a musician has his own article, it does not necessarily mean he is notable. From the looks of the musicians with their own articles, both (other than Baksh) don't look notable. Timmeh 15:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes but all three of the musicians with articles have, including their associated acts, separate acts as well which have their own articles. To me, this means they would probably pass an afd on their independent notabilities. Assuming that at least Coles and Baksh would pass, then I cannot honestly say that WP:MUSIC is failed. However, since only one of the criteria is passed the keep is indeed a week one. ZabMilenko^{How am I driving?} 05:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Just as a note, it looks like Coles isn't notable. See the Google News search which only turns up one result that briefly mentions Coles. Timmeh 03:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - Coles is a member of two notable bands, though: Cauterize and Brown Brigade. That's usually enough for WP:MUSICBIO. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        I am really beginning to dislike that criterion. A band is notable simply because two of its members are notable simply because another band is notable? The notability of this band seems to depend solely on the individual notability of a completely different band. The music notability guideline will say what it says, but I really think there should be reliable sources covering this band in detail before it deserves an article. Tim meh 15:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        The last time a suggestion was made to deprecate criterion #6, in this discussion a few months ago, consensus was not reached to remove the criterion, although the required standard was tightened up. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 14:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        That looks like an interesting discussion, and I may be able to learn something from it. I'll get to reading it more thoroughly after the holiday. Tim meh 02:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        
        I'm not terribly fond of it either, but the problem is that regardless of whether they're notable enough for their own article, a musician is always entitled to be at least a redirect to their band. But if they've been in two different notable bands, then how do you decide which of their bands gets priority over the other one as the redirect target? The answer is that without violating WP:NPOV and other Wikipedia proscriptions against arbitrariness, you don't — so until it becomes possible to redirect one title to two different articles at once, making that a criterion for a separate article is the only solution that survives the neutrality test. Bearcat (talk) 12:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, notability is not inherited.--Cannibaloki 18:01, 3 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} 14:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for reasons already listed. magnius (talk) 18:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Chuck Coles, as it seems to be his side project. I think that the WP:BAND suggestion that bands with multiple notable members is likely notable itself is quite wise but not infallible. DoubleBlue (talk) 18:41, 6 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.