Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Be The Bear
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 14:51, 5 February 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 14:51, 5 February 2023 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Be The Bear[edit]
- Be The Bear (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested PROD. This Swedish band only recently released their first single; a singlenewspaper article, together with a couple of song appearances in ads, has been offered as evidence of the band's notability. I do not think that Be the Bear meets WP:BAND or, more broadly, WP:N at this time. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 21:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. — Baseball Watcher 23:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — Baseball Watcher 23:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I also can find no reliable source beyond the single newspaper article. Also consider the "too soon" guideline - the band has not yet achieved notability. --DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, too soon for this band. I think userfying the article to the original authors subpage is a good idea, if the band has got a newspaper review after just one single then they are likely to become notable before long. doomgaze (talk) 14:48, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable. When a prod is removed as here without any specific rationale or showing as to why it is not PROD-worthy, that tends to be a red flag that no such rationale exits, and the article is about a non-notable subject.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:14, 29 May 2011 (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.