Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sack Trick

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2020 October 17.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. I would normally have closed this as redirect given our policy on alternatives to deletion. However, there is a compelling reason which gained consensus why to delete instead of redirect in this instance. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sack Trick[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable band. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

edit Adding band's albums per discussion further down this page. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 19:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the band had some notable members, I question the notability of the band in general based on sourcing. The article is solely sourced to the official website and the band's Myspace blog, none of these are reliable or secondary sources. The article has a multiple issues tag on it. Google search brought the usual junk sites like databases, streaming service entries, retail sites, WP mirrors, blogs, blank Allmusic page, press releases, concert announcements... I also looked up their albums and the results are the same - streaming service entries, databases, blogs, retail sites, trivial mentions and stuff where the words are separated. I did not found any reliable source whatsoever. Even though all of their albums have articles, none of them contain any sources. The "Penguins" album seems to have gotten several great reviews from reputable magazines like Metal Hammer, Kerrang and Rock Sound (based on the article), but the reviews themselves are not cited, just quotes from them, which reads rather promotional. (If anybody has said reviews, please post it here and then I insert them in the article - I did not found them and I can't track them down because I'm not keen on that). So in conclusion, I think Sack Trick is not a notable band - the title can stay as a redirect to any of the members' pages but is not notable for its own article. Article creator's only edit was this before he disappeared into thin air. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:00, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Redirect to band member Chris Dale. Is there a reason why their albums are not being listed for deletion? If there isn't, then the albums should be merged into the band article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If Chris Dale's article is kept, the album articles can be redirected to him or his band. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:05, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jax 0677: I think if the article gets deleted, the albums go with it, if the title stays as a redirect, they will get deleted as well - if I remember correctly. But yeah, they aren't notable either. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Not necessarily, I think they must all be nominated individually, and be open to discussion for at least one week. Case in point, Angela Via. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Okay then, I nominate all of their albums to deletion as well without a separate AfD:
(Music From) The Mystery Rabbits
Penguins on the Moon
Sheep in Kiss Make Up

They are equally not notable. Btw,@Jax 0677:, Chris Dale is up to deletion as well. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The AFD tag needs to be at the top of the album articles, or the AFD for those albums is not valid. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done: and I vote Delete all: insufficient coverage to pass WP:NBAND or WP:NALBUM. I've nominated Chris Dale's page for deletion, but if the outcome of that discussion is "keep" then it would make sense to redirect Sack Trick to his page. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 11:38, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think that the three album articles need to be listed at the very top of this AFD as well, and the AFD should not be closed until one week after this happens, unless WP:SNOW is invoked. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:12, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fair enough: I've added them below the main nomination. Note to closing admin: can we allow this discussion to run for seven days from this comment? ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 19:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: seems to be a bit of a mess, three articles added to the discussion belatedly, would benefit from an additional seven days of discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:47, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑Scottywong | [comment] || 04:06, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Dale was just closed as "No Consensus". To be clear, I recommend either improving the three album articles, redirecting them to Sack Trick if that article remains, or redirecting them to Chris Dale if the "Sack Trick" article gets redirected to Chris Dale. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment that no consensus close with such a poorly unsourced article seems to be a failure of the AfD process. I wonder why more people didn't comment. It was relisted twice. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 00:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:09, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Chris Dale until that article is deleted. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:37, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. Next time, please redirect unsourced album articles to the band—that doesn't warrant discussion. I've boldly redirect Chris Dale per its AfD and complete lack of secondary source coverage. The band itself, Sack Trick, had no significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources (?) per a search in my custom Google search engine of music sources. Courtesy pings for @Jax 0677 and Timtempleton, in case you want to reconsider your position. czar 17:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I reverted the redirect for Chris Dale per WP:BRD, as this article was recently kept per the "No Consensus" AFD that recently transpired. I see no harm in listing the three albums at AFD along with Sack Trick. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:24, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom and Czar. A curiosity at best. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:20, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
delete as obvious consensus. I thought a n extra week wou ld resolve this once it was known late in the discussion that Chris Dale closed NC and it has. I'm not closing as there was a complaint about the relist and closing would just pour petrol on the flames. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:27, 16 October 2020 (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.