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. postdlf (talk) 22:31, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Destroid[edit]

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

Advert for band lacking notability. Article has a bombardment of references. When you get rid of youtube, blogs, fanzines, primary,sound facebook, user contributed, gig listings, stores, lyrics site, press release, refs where Destroid isn't mentioned you are left with nothing. Blow it away. duffbeerforme (talk) 08:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I could list all 44 sources and detail why each one is unusable to show notability, but ultimately that'd be a waste of time since there are so many. The bottom line is that many of the sources that initially look usable are actually about other people's accomplishments outside of the group. For instance, [Destroid#Existence_Conspiracy|the article mentions]] that they had a music video recorded by Mike Diva and that he won an award for something non-Destroid related. It doesn't help that the same section goes into excruciating detail about the marketing video made for the band, which comes across as pretty spammy. I might clean it up just to remove all of the blatantly unusable and spammy links, as well as the listing of every tour date and so on. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:51, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've cleaned out the worst of the promotional prose and tone. The result is that almost all of the sources were removed since they were blog entries, press releases, and various primary sources. I've left two on the page, one MTV link about tour dates (primary/trivial) and one where they got onto a best list at a download site (merchant source, technically). It's dramatically different from the original version, which can be seen here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:50, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Tokyogirl79. I'm not even sure the MTV source is particularly good, just listing a band's tour dates saying nothing at all why they're notable or not. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:14, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That was more of a trivial source at best and I used it more to back up that they've done some live performances. I was feeling slightly bad that none of the sources were usable to show notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:56, 7 September 2013 (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.