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 no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:49, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Street Pharmacy[edit]

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

The article seems to be very promotional, contains detailed information that doesn't appear to be within references and doesn't appear to be notable (No major press, no major recognition apart from a few local nominations and very limited album sales stated). The article is also heavily tended by only 1 user who doesn't appear to contribute elsewhere. Nomination for deletion is based on notability and potential that article is created for advertising purposes Clovis Sangrail (talk) 05:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Nothing in the article suggests that this group meets WP:BAND. The band has only released independent albums; the media coverage is the very definition of "trivial"; its awards are nowhere near "major"; and the appearance on a reality television show does not go any way to establishing notability. --Mkativerata (talk) 05:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Article is being compiled by non-band member with no motive to advertise. More than willing to remove seemingly promotional links. User is also new to wikipedia entry creation, thus page is frequently being updated to ensure proper formatting (and thus heavily tended to). Band has international recognition, and is currently starring on the leading music network in Canada, therefore notability is relative. It is agreed that references need to be solidified and specified, and this will be improved upon. Kv05ko (talk) 05:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - In what respect does the band have "international recognition"? --Mkativerata (talk) 05:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment - Band has toured, received airplay, and produced music for albums in Canada, the United States, and Cuba. Kv05ko (talk) 06:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Comment Rather than being "international", the significant attention appears to be Ontario based. Their notability in Ontario is unquestioned, but are their notability outside is more questionable (Is recognition in Ontario enough?). Have any singles / albums charted in Canada or outside? Clovis Sangrail (talk) 23:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - Comment While their notability as an "international" success is questionable, their recognition in Ontario is certainly enough to be considered noteworthy in the Canadian music industry. The band has been popularized by the nation's leading music channel, and have gained the interest of major agents and labels. They are in the process of choosing a high-profile agent, and signing a major distribution deal (both of which will be chronicled on national television). Given the degree of band information and press reception alone, I think that having a Wikipedia article about the band is more than justified.Kv05ko (talk) 07:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - Comment "have gained the interest of major agents and labels" is not a strong statement for outside recognition (thought they may be picked up in the future) Clovis Sangrail (talk) 02:00, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Kv05ko's reasoning. Strong notability in one area should lend this band enough notability to stay on Wikipedia, even if they're not notable on the international scene. Lithorien (talk) 16:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete average local rock band. nn SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
Comment I've noticed that the main author of the article is uploading photos sourced to one of the band members (potential conflict of interest?) Clovis Sangrail (talk) 01:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I added a ((COI)) tag to the article. ttonyb (talk) 01:34, 21 December 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.