Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dethcentrik (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
obvious vandalism and unfounded reasons for deletion
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
{{oldafdfull|result=speedy keep|votepage=as appropriate|date=13 August 2011}}
{{oldafdfull|result=speedy keep|votepage=as appropriate|date=13 August 2011}}
===[[Dethcentrik]]===
===[[Dethcentrik]]===

Revision as of 15:43, 13 August 2011

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.

Dethcentrik

AfDs for this article:
Dethcentrik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does not establish notability. The links are mostly fake. Its not even clear whether or not the band actually exists. The links that do go somewhere also look like they were planted as part of a hoax with further links leading to random places. Even if they do exist no notability has been established dispite the article being tagged for notability and primary sources since 2008. see WP:BAND. This page was deleted before for the same reasons. - Metal lunchbox (talk) 01:18, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 01:53, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I am not aware what makes a link "fake." Some are broken granted (3), but I was able to click them and see there are plenty of opinions given about the band, and plenty of things written about them by a third party: Terrorizer, Metal Breakfast Radio, Deep Six Radio, and One Step Beyond Radio give opinions about the band, and Inside Heavy, and The Gauntlet has articles written about the band as well. Also, I do not see how a band can be "fake" it exists. Bands that exist cannot be listed by All Music, which provides for MTV, AOL Music, Billboard, and many others, and states that they must receive a commercially available CD to list it.[1] Also, the band has not been tagged for notability and sources since 2008, it's been tagged that way since apparently tomorrow, and the page was created on October 15, 2010, so that isn't possible. --BusyWikipedian (talk) 02:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You've got your facts wrong the page was created a while ago, was deleted and was recently undeleted. As for the refs I suggest you take a much closer look. The MTV.com link gives no commentary whatsoever just a picture and 7 track names. That the band exists is irrelevant. The issue is whether or not they are notable and the article does not establish this. The first 3 links are dead. The links to the Guantlet do not go to articles about Dethcentric. RushPR news is obvously self-published so not useful. Most of these pages linked to are about as good in establishing notability as a Myspace page. Take for instance the "Inside Heavy" article which claims to be about a youtube video. The multiple links to the video just goes to the HeavyMetalFreak.com homepage. The AOl link you give proves my point it has zero information about the band, like so many of the other refs its just a track list. There is no reliable source to establish notability but there is an amazing amount of effort that has been put into creating the appreance of notability. There's no Billboard ref. This is clearly an effort to game the system, in this case for someone to promote their not-notable band. That someone got a few websites to repeat what was printed in a press release is not notability. Metal lunchbox (talk) 03:00, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lie: "You've got your facts wrong the page was created a while ago, was deleted and was recently undeleted" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_16#Dethcentrik . Lie: "The links to the Guantlet do not go to articles about Dethcentric" This one: http://www.thegauntlet.com/article/4370/21881/DETHCENTRIK-EP-Tracklisting-Revealed . These were written as well: http://www.thegauntlet.com/article/4370/21953/DETHCENTRIK-Releases-Controversial-New-Video , http://www.thegauntlet.com/article/4370/21850/DETHCENTRIK-Post-New-Track , Inside Heavy also acknowledges syndicating this article: http://www.thegauntlet.com/article/4370/21992/Dethcentrik-Video-Banned-By-Youtube . You are not being honest Wikipedia:Honesty. Billboard doees list this artist: http://www.billboard.com/artist/dethcentrik/1622748 BusyWikipedian (talk) 04:32, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not accuse me of lying. doesn't it seem a little bizarre that someone would make up a bunch of lies so that they could lobby for the deletion of some random wikipedia article. The page is advertisement and it doesn't belong on wikipedia. I have no explanation for the dating on the souce/notability tag. I reported it the way I saw it. I had not seen all the records but had seen that the page had been deleted before. Also you did not provide a billboard ref so I said so after you mentioned it. None of this changes anything. The topic is not notable. 07:06, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Keep From clicking the links throughout the page, I can easily tell the links do work. The webpage links that I have clicked express a third-party opinion of the band itself. The infomation given on this Wikipedia webpage are correct and functional. I have found no problems with the article, and found it very useful and infomational. 174.24.56.54 (talk) 03:06, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thankfully these decisions aren't made by counting votes, or they'd be constantly abused. Metal lunchbox (talk) 03:30, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no notability shown for this band. albums not on important label. band lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. inclusion on a Terrorizer's sampler cd is not significant coverage. of the other multitude of references they are either trivial coverage (like the mtv listing), are press releases or are not reliable sources. nothing satisfying wp:music. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:36, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Another discussion with me! Wikipedia:Wikistalking? BusyWikipedian (talk) 04:32, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
if you are making an accusation, then you better have some evidence. Someone having been invovled in a discussion with you before does not prohibit them from being involved in this discussion. Metal lunchbox (talk) 04:52, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If user:duffbeerforme assures me he isn't following me maliciously, I will believe him. This is not your place to argue, you're harassing me as a user yourself with all the back talk. I apologize for whatever I may have done to upset you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BusyWikipedian (talk • contribs) 06:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know you and I am not that interested in you. I'm just trying to maintain wikipedia. Metal lunchbox (talk) 06:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Band includes "inclusion on a notable compilation album." And the write-up qualifies as a third party opinion. The Gauntlet's articles are not press releases, and Wikipedia does have a criteria for cited press releases, and all the cited press releases meet this criteriaBusyWikipedian (talk) 13:24, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ http://www.allmusic.com/about/product-submissions
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dethcentrik_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=444643570"