Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elora Danan (band)
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 04:53, 15 March 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 04:53, 15 March 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 keep. The delete "votes" are rather weak, so I feel the editors in favor of keeping the article made a stronger case. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:10, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Elora Danan (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Lacks notability. No mention of awards, no mention of charted singles or albums. Rtphokie (talk) 12:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:MUSIC. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete fails WP:BAND. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note - This is dangerously close to filling WP:BAND point 5. They seem to have 2 albums under a notable label. OlYellerTalktome 19:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Having looked at Boomtown Records, with a total of 31 releases in its history, I certainly wouldn't call it "a major label or one of the more important indie labels" as mandated by the guideline. Motown it ain't. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment for what it's worth Boomtown Records is being discussed for deletion as well.--Rtphokie (talk) 01:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Having looked at Boomtown Records, with a total of 31 releases in its history, I certainly wouldn't call it "a major label or one of the more important indie labels" as mandated by the guideline. Motown it ain't. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 01:48, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, third-party media coverage here, here and here. Meets criteia #1 of WP:BAND easily, and as I was able to find these in about thirty seconds using Google, I do wonder how much looking for sources the above !voters actually did. Lankiveil (speak to me) 03:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]
- Keep minor but notable band - Boomtown Records is a notable independent record label. Dan arndt (talk) 23:27, 14 March 2009 (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.