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 redirect to David Bowie. If the creator continues to revert the redirect, some disciplinary action is probably necessary here. (X! · talk) · @915 · 20:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Konrads[edit]

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

The entire text of this article is "David Bowie's first band." That information is already in the David Bowie article. I keep trying to redirect, and keep getting reverted without explanation. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Simple as that. You surely don't need an Afd for this.--Pam Soda (talk) 05:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I did redirect, twice, and you reverted me twice. Are you willing to stop reverting me? NawlinWiki (talk) 05:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per A3, the situation is confusing though... nom tried to r/d the page and Pam Soda (talk · contribs) reverted it twice, and now he calls for a r/d himself... I'm rather puzzled. As such, I'm !voting speedy rather than r/d. Blodance (talk) 06:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to David Bowie. now that Pam Soda is blocked indefly as a sock , I think it's safe to simply r/d it. Blodance the Seeker 09:48, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I don't really see any reason for a deletion here; it seems both the nominator and creator are in agreement with a redirect, and I see no reason to argue the redirect is implausible, so I'd say go for it. I'm a bit confused of the circumstances of reverting the redirect and then going for the redirect, but that is neither a discussion for here nor is it a discussion that is necessary. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 08:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to request for Pam Soda's clarification. If the redirect is uncontroversial, why on earth is he reverting it? Blodance (talk) 10:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete and throw a redirect in for good measure. The band seems totally non-notable on its own, there's no real reason to give it a page apart from Bowie, and as the information is already on Bowie's page there's no need for a separate page in. On top of that, the article is...sparse would be putting it mildly, and calling it a stub seems to be an insult to stubs everywhere. There's really no reason not to get rid of it quickly.Tyrenon (talk) 10:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Speedily, if possible, under Wp:CSD#A3 (there's very little, if anything, on there worth saving). (It seems strange that the person who keeps killing the redirects wants it to be redirected.) DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 14:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I created this page and in my opinion I don't believe this page, charting a milestone point of David Bowie's career should simply be deleted. Pictures of him in this band can be sourced from http://www.bowiewonderworld.com/tours/tour58.htm

If The Quarrymen (early incarnation of the beatles) is referenced and has it's own page on Wikipedia then surely Bowie's equivalent should be as well. There are also official recordings from this band on Davie Bowie boxed sets.Vox Teardrop I intend to list a discography and a color picture at some point in the near future.Vox Teardrop

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and protect. Article as it stands is very much a speedy candidate, and precedent for early bands being redirected to their only notable member is pretty clear. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and protect. I can't find enough sources to give this band notability independent of David Bowie. There seems to be some misunderstanding about speedy deleting though - a) it would be pointless to delete the article and then recreate it as a redirect...b) we want to preserve the page history (however minimal as it is). Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 21:33, 18 January 2010 (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.