Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kubichek!

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. Davewild (talk) 07:05, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kubichek!

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

Article completely unsourced, No top 100 hits, no notable band members; does not meet notability guidelines for musicians Scr★pIron^IV 20:11, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 00:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 01:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete--yeah, there's clearly no there there. No hits, no major record deal, no coverage... Drmies (talk) 17:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The Rockfeedback reviews (external links misplaced in a "Reviews" section) may have been intended as references. Rockfeedback, however, appears to be self-published. Even if it is a reliable source, the reviews altogether would count as one source, notability-wise, since they're all be the same author. Otherwise the best source I could find was this scant eight sentence, 110 word review. The next three largest reviews [1], [2], and [3] put together only amount to seven sentences. Not enough depth to meet WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Worldbruce (talk) 00:08, 30 July 2015 (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.