Talk:Baby Shakes: Difference between revisions
→Speedy deletion ?: reply |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
The band has official publications, and a certain high profile through their publications and their world wide concerts. IMHO all this facts legitimate that article. --[[Special:Contributions/78.48.5.86|78.48.5.86]] ([[User talk:78.48.5.86|talk]]) 09:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC) |
The band has official publications, and a certain high profile through their publications and their world wide concerts. IMHO all this facts legitimate that article. --[[Special:Contributions/78.48.5.86|78.48.5.86]] ([[User talk:78.48.5.86|talk]]) 09:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC) |
||
:Not if [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that significantly cover the band in independent coverage are not included in the article. A passing mention in Rolling Stone magazine is not enough to satisfy [[WP:N|notability]]. [[User:ArcAngel|ArcAngel]] ([[User talk:ArcAngel|talk]]) 09:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC) |
:Not if [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that significantly cover the band in independent coverage are not included in the article. A passing mention in Rolling Stone magazine is not enough to satisfy [[WP:N|notability]]. [[User:ArcAngel|ArcAngel]] ([[User talk:ArcAngel|talk]]) 09:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC) |
||
The band has official publications, and a certain high profile through their publications and their world wide concerts. IMHO all this facts legitimate that article. Or in other words: it is expectable, that people look for condensed informations here in wikipedia. It is not my aim to push the band, but to concentrate scattered informations - the main idea of an encyclopdia. --[[User:Twsttwtw|Twsttwtw]] ([[User talk:Twsttwtw|talk]]) 09:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC) |
|||
It is not a mention in RS magazine, it is the fact, that we can expect enough people (not only some "family members") making recherche for informations. --[[User:Twsttwtw|Twsttwtw]] ([[User talk:Twsttwtw|talk]]) 09:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 09:40, 14 November 2009
CSD Tagging
I originally tagged the article as G3 based upon what I saw (Douchemaster Records, Shit Sandwich Records), then upon further review decided that db-band was a better fit. However when I went back to the article to correct the tag it had already been changed to the correct one, even though the history showed myself as the last edit. ArcAngel (talk) 09:12, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion ?
The band has official publications, and a certain high profile through their publications and their world wide concerts. IMHO all this facts legitimate that article. --78.48.5.86 (talk) 09:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- Not if reliable sources that significantly cover the band in independent coverage are not included in the article. A passing mention in Rolling Stone magazine is not enough to satisfy notability. ArcAngel (talk) 09:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
The band has official publications, and a certain high profile through their publications and their world wide concerts. IMHO all this facts legitimate that article. Or in other words: it is expectable, that people look for condensed informations here in wikipedia. It is not my aim to push the band, but to concentrate scattered informations - the main idea of an encyclopdia. --Twsttwtw (talk) 09:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
It is not a mention in RS magazine, it is the fact, that we can expect enough people (not only some "family members") making recherche for informations. --Twsttwtw (talk) 09:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC)